Berwick Planning Board Gives Preliminary OK to Megan's Meadow Lot

[0:00] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Good evening, everybody. I would like to welcome you to the Town of Berwick Planning Board for Thursday, September 17th, 2026. If we could all please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Sorry, Niles, I started that before you were standing up. So it's all right, I was so excited to pledge my allegiance. I'd like to introduce our board members. To my left, I've got Jeff Brooks. Jeff, we're going to recognize you as a voting member tonight since George Clausen is not here. I've got Rick Rains, the vice chair. To my right, we've got Megan Burgess, Daniel Hook, and Niall Shore, the infamous. We've got Terry Wilson, our code enforcement officer, here, and James Bellissimo, the town planner, here tonight. I think we got everybody. So moving on to the approval of minutes from the September 17th meeting. Has everybody had a chance to review those? I [1:16] Planning Board member: have reviewed the minutes and find them to be accurate and make a motion to accept them as written. Wow, I have a motion. Can I have a second that motion? All [1:26] Chair (Planning Board Chair): All right, I have a motion and a second to approve the minutes as written. Any further discussion on that? Okay, seeing nobody raise their hand. All in favor of approving the minutes? All opposed and all abstained. All right, so moving on, we will, I'm gonna bypass our public comment because there is no public here, just Neil Raposa. And so we're gonna move on to the public hearing for Megan's Meadow subdivision amendment. This is the creation of one lot, map R37, lot 6, in the R2 zone. LRB [2:08] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): Leasing LLC is the applicant. Thank you, Nicole. Yes, I'm Neil Raposa, I'm a silicon salt smoothing care map. LRB Leasing been before the board a few times with this project. This is speaking to the microphone, are we on? Okay, thank you. So yes, we're, as Nicole mentioned, this is the addition of single-family lots to an existing multifamily development that previously had another one single lot split off it. So this one came about due to the applicant obtaining additional land through a land swap with an abutter that allowed him to increase the density of the overall lot and make this additional lot split possible. There were discussions at the prior meetings concerning the access road, the responsibilities, upgrading of that. We did go back into the records for the land transfer that was that was that happened between the abutter and LRB Leasing to gain that extra that land that is allowing for this split. And part of that was that the developer off to the north, as soon as anything happened to increase the traffic on that road, it became that developer's responsibility to perform all the maintenance within the right of way for that whole road coming all the way down the cemetery. So any improvements that the town felt was required for that, you know, expanded use would have to be done by that developer. There was also a question about fire safety, and we did meet with the fire chief, and we got a response only today that he was he was satisfied with the existing fire protection and that the single family that was proposed did not require any additional fire safety apparatus or provisions. [4:26] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Excellent. There are no members of the public here for the public hearing, so would you say it's safe to close the public hearing? Yes. Okay, then I will close the public hearing and we will move on to unfinished business, unfinished business which happens to also be this application. I'm guessing you don't have anything more to add than [4:49] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): you just said to us. That's pretty much everything we have. I know I know I'm aware that James has put together a draft findings of fact with some items that are conditions. I have not been able to go through all of them with the applicant, but I do know that as far as the open space, I was able to speak with him before I saw the findings of fact, draft findings of fact come out, and he did say that there were walking paths that were mentioned in the in the previous approval, and he said those are all existing. He says they're maintained, but they're not cleared. He said it's it's more of a, you know, more of a woods walking path, so it's not a not a it's not a fully maintained, you know, going out there with an uncleared path basically. Yeah, it's not a that just sounds like the woods, the woods to be honest. I have not been out to walk the path, so I don't have a don't have a frame of reference on it, so yeah, but he did indicate that there were, you know, there were the existing paths [5:53] Planning Board member: out there prior to this. Did he indicate that he was willing to do something about the clearing [5:57] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): of said paths? It was not, we didn't discuss it. He said he said they were [6:02] Planning Board member: College, maybe you should talk about that with him. Since he came before us ten years ago, is it now, and said he would have those paths cleared, and ten years later they aren't cleared, and now he wants more. Maybe just good sense would indicate he should keep the earlier promises before he makes new ones. Just [6:24] Chair (Planning Board Chair): saying, as they say, I will say that this applicant, just for the record, does have a history of non-compliance in with other projects in town, not this one. Well, no, so that is just something that I would like the board to know, because they're not all aware of that. It, you know, it is something that is factored into this. Anybody else have any questions? I'll just comment on the [6:52] Planning Board member: the walking paths. I need to probably put eyes on those paths, because it doesn't sound like they are defined. Your quote of there are walking paths, they're just not cleared, is not sitting well with me. And to be honest with you, I like, I said, I have not been out there [7:16] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): so I, yeah, that's the, maybe, you know, not, yeah, no, entirely, you know, you know, true picture of [7:24] Planning Board member: sure what it is, sure. And speaking to what Nicole said and what Niles said, we seem to have applicants who say one thing and then do another, or don't do it, or don't do another, and then come before us for the next project. And I'm finding it harder and harder to feel good about moving forward when we haven't finished up what's behind. Madam Chair, could I ask, yes, during this process, at some point we're asked to look at essentially capacity to do the project. Would failure to carry out prior promises and comply with prior conditions be relevant to our future consideration of capacity? I think James can speak to it if it's the same as what we were talking about. [8:26] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Yeah, I think my talk to Bill this past week, we talked about, So especially where less is the shared contractor between the two entities, that is one way to draw in that technical capacity, because it talks about contractors specifically. In terms of the owner being in violation, that's something that is more, something I might need to get a second opinion on in terms of Naveen Estates, LOC, and LRB Leasing, LOC. They may be two distinct entities. But technical capacity, it does say consultants, so civil consultants is a mutual engineer, and then their contractors are also included in that technical capacity. [9:20] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Okay. Because it is worth noting that the next thing on our agenda is also another application from this applicant, so it's, and while they will be looked at separately, it's just a compounding thing, so yeah, please, the [9:40] Town Attorney / legal counsel: board may entertain some sort of condition of approval that this is something I could think about if we wanted to have it crystallized by final approval, but I've kind of kicked around the idea with the town attorney, seemed comfortable with making sure that if there's any prior violations and it has to be tied to the contractor, so it have to be worded a specific way, so potentially conditionally approving this condition upon any prior projects better have violations that those violations give us all we're not looking [10:20] Chair (Planning Board Chair): for approval tonight though, right, just preliminary, just yeah. [10:24] Planning Board member: James, can I ask, when you say violations, prior violations, would that mean previous conditions that weren't met? [10:34] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Yeah. Yeah. For all intents and purposes, a condition of approval that's not met is the same as a violation of the ordinance. [10:43] Planning Board member: I just wanted to get that clear. [10:44] Chair (Planning Board Chair): So I see that under our standards, under 11.10, you kind of mentioned this. The board is considered the applicant's previous experience, the experience of its consultants, and whether there are violations of previous approvals granted to the applicant, LRB Leasing LLC, this standard. And then you did not say that it was met. Usually it'll say is met, which also is a little thank you flag for us. So, yeah, I think I would, I mean, I think we would like to see something showing the completeness of that. It would be nice to see a completed like show us paths I guess this I guess what [11:27] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): I'm presenting here is just for this project an amendment to a subdivision [11:31] Chair (Planning Board Chair): that wasn't completed because the plants aren't there, so as far as the paths go, yeah, okay, and then so under our did you see the draft conditions, did you, okay, so you saw the open space, yes, that's that's something I that's I [11:50] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): I wasn't able to talk with him about that specifically because I got out late, but I had discussed it when we were talking about the paths and that portion of it. And I said that, you know, an open space to set that aside as something that would not be developed, you know, might make sense, and he was open to that. So I think that's something we can work with going forward. [12:11] Planning Board member: Be a good spot for paths, especially a cleared one. [12:19] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Okay so we were, I was kind of talking with James about this and Neil, I'm sure you overheard it. We're talking about the farmland thing, the draft condition number four, not to skip around, but we talked about fire chief already. Is before the final plan approval the applicant shall state in writing whether any farmland lies within the subdivision. Any farmland shall be identified on the plan. I don't think there's any in the subdivision, but on our standards 11.18 says there's no active farm or farm operation within 200 feet of the subdivision, and that's what I wanted to bring up, that I wasn't, I wasn't sure about, because if you go directly across the street from Megan's Way, there is farmland there that is actively farmed. I don't know who's farming me it, I think the rights own it, but that was, so that was just, I don't know, part of that is just it doesn't say within 200, like it says within the subdivision or within 200 feet, so what is it, what's, yeah, I think it just, what can you, what's the standard 11.18 on our, it says within 200 feet [13:25] Planning Board member: of the subdivision, there's more than 200 feet, yeah, between that and the end of the road, just okay, I [13:30] Chair (Planning Board Chair): don't know, yeah, there is, as I recall, I think the, like the going back to, but then I see condition four and it just has no farm, like within the subdivision, that was, that was where I was [13:40] Town Attorney / legal counsel: purpose of like mapping farmland on the plans, just so we can see, hey, there's, there's prime farm land here, can this be used in the open space, or can you not put a house there, and then I think the purpose behind identifying farms that are close by is I believe there needs to be some sort of disclosure saying like if a subdivision goes in next to a farm, then it's on the people that are selling a lot to disclose that, hey, you're moving next to a farm, okay, and the town is not going to, as long as a farm is following best farm practices when it comes to smells or noise, the tractor is, that comes first for Berberwick because we value agriculture, that's [14:30] Chair (Planning Board Chair): I think that's the purpose behind, okay, that's good to, that's good to know, because I was confused about those things, I like condition, drop condition number four, that the, that the it'll show, because the setbacks were adjusted based on the average setbacks for the road right, yeah [14:50] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): Yeah, that's what that one's discussing is this portion here with this, the new, the proposed lot kind of has it skimmies up here, so it has, it has enough frontage on that roadway, but for the width of the of the lot, that building setback line has to be pushed back to get that lot width to right to meet the standards. Yeah, it ends up being very similar to the adjacent log where that house lies. It's going to be right in line [15:22] Chair (Planning Board Chair): with that, the front of it. Perfect. Yeah, and so this condition just says that no structure shall be closer on to Megan's Way than that. Yeah, there was a shed or anything like that, I wasn't sure what [15:32] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): Yeah, I wasn't sure what that was truly trying to, what we needed to indicate on a plan. I don't know if we had our subdivision plan, yeah, with the setback line, I wasn't sure what else we needed to [15:43] Chair (Planning Board Chair): put on that. I, yeah, it'll be on the condition, so it'll be on the plan. Okay, I think, well, I don't [15:50] Town Attorney / legal counsel: know, I might have missed it, but I thought it looked like more like a building envelope than an actual setback, so if it actually says setback, oh okay, or if it's indicated on the plan the setback is that line, you know what I mean? I don't know if you have your typical dimensional requirements [16:03] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): Maybe there's a parenthesis this lot you have that since it's not a typical right on the front [16:09] Chair (Planning Board Chair): on road. Okay, understood. Yeah, just in case they want to put a garage or a shed or something like that. Anybody else have any questions, comments, or concerns about the findings of fact, conditions, or anything else? Jeff got anything for us? I think I'm at my, I might, I'm just [16:30] Planning Board member: looking at the same as the rest of you, if there's something else not done somewhere else. Yeah, you, I'm not voting for it. Yeah, anything nothing more than I've already stated. All right. [16:44] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Daniel, Megan, good. All right, so are we looking for a motion for prelim approval? [16:52] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Yeah, if the board wants to entertain it, that's where we're at in the process. Yeah, and then final [16:58] Chair (Planning Board Chair): plan would be us reviewing the created trails. We obviously wouldn't vote on final approval until we were all satisfied with everything. That's correct, so it's not like, yeah, we're not voting. [17:10] Planning Board member: Okay, go ahead. One question on the on 11.10 with the standard not being met, yep. [17:20] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Can we say that the findings of fact? Well, we're not voting on final yet, so we're not going to vote on findings of fact or conditions yet. All right, excellent. Tell me to go back to the drawing. I'm going to move that we grant preliminary approval for Megan's Way, the, we didn't, it's not on here, Megan's Meadow subdivision amendment with for the creation of one lot. One of you guys needs to second. Now I will second. Okay, great. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion on this? Okay, seeing no further discussion, all in favor of preliminary approval? All right, that is 5-0 or 6-0, I can't count tonight. Great, so I guess we need to explore further the technical capacity portion of it. [18:27] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Yeah, I had a, I'll discuss again with the town attorney about how exactly that wording needs to be drafted. [18:37] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Awesome. And, yeah, and then just the draft findings of that, or conditions, which you have? Yep. [18:46] Planning Board member: Okay. And James, could you check that the ability to do what you promised to do is a part of technical capacity? [18:58] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Moving on to new business, this is a sketch plan, so the very first for subdivision amendment and a major subdivision, 117 Old Pine Hill Road, that's Matthew 7 lot 47 R1 zone, LRB Leasing. All [19:20] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): right, hi, Neil again, Neil Reposes, Civil Consultants, New England, I hear behalf of LRB Leasing, and this is a modification to an existing multi-family development that was put in previously, and now it's looking to be expanded adhering to the LD 2003 rules for expanded affordable housing. So the provisions of those regulations allow for expansion of this use on this site. The density requirements for it allow for two areas of increase in units on this site. If we're looking here, this is the currently developed portion on Old Pine Hill Road with the existing buildings here that are occupied, and then previous to this a lot was split off on Pine Hill Road from this lot that still left room for access out to the portion of this lot, which is, this is a large wetland that traverses the site through the middle, and when we took all the density out and did the calculations for the increased density for the LD 2003 and the affordable housing it was found that we could we could we could get in another six unit building here as well as a two unit building that would fit with the landscape of the existing development up top there actually was land for additional density but there's just there's no place to put anything here it didn't make sense to try and impact any more wetlands or cross wetlands so this was where the where the development expansion stopped with what's shown on our plans here year. So this, originally did come in for sketch last year. So the time has lapsed or back in for sketch. At that time, I went through and had the reviews by fire and police and all those all those entities. And it's basically the same, development, same comments. We did file for a heard it by notification with the dep for the proposed impacts to the wetlands here, and we also did the self-verification with the army corps to make sure they were aware of the impacts that were going to be proposed. So those were all taken care of and approved, and so now we're back in front of you to for sketch to see what else we think needs to be included on this plan. I'm going [22:07] Chair (Planning Board Chair): to tell you that I have had the sewer department contact me personally specifically about Mr. Bodwell the applicant and saying that they would like the planning board to really strictly adhere to our standards, which is to for any applicant that is doing a major subdivision that is serviced by town water, which this will be, that plan actually go to the sewer department and basically get their stamp of approval. Not just like send them the plan and, hey, we sent them the plan, which is what it looks like happened, but they would like to review it. They would like to send us back a memo or some kind of a stamp of approval. So I'm going to just put that on your radar that you're not getting through because I don't want another phone call from them. So just put that on the radar for us. [23:02] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): This one I did want to sit down. We did sit down with them and discuss it because it was we had some changes that we kind of we did go back and forth with the sewer district on the best way to make to make this connection down at Pine Hill. Yeah, that's one of the reasons if you're if you take a look at the close-up detail. Yeah, we have a little bit more of a more of an angle a little bit more of a stranger connection that we know normally have. Okay, we sat down and talked with them and said you know this is where we want to see that get in there and this is how. Recently not from the last time. No, this was [23:35] Chair (Planning Board Chair): from the last time. Okay, so I might ask you to just talk to Jay again, right? I don't think we ever got [23:41] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): a final determination from Jay because it got pulled you know early on. Yeah, so I think it's yeah we will be going back and reiterating everything with all the utilities. So thank you. [23:55] Planning Board member: Neil can I just ask you was this two unit part of your original as well that the two units [24:02] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): the previous sketch plan was it was there too. There had been no change to the plans at all [24:09] Chair (Planning Board Chair): since last time it was presented. I had a question about the impervious area because somehow I came up with three different numbers. Do you know what the total impervious area actually is? I think there's like on James's memo it was like 0.98 but then I found it somewhere else. I don't have to go back through it's been a few days but it just I came up with three different numbers somewhere a little over one acre somewhere and then this one's like 0.98 mostly if I know [24:43] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): when we're looking at the at the created impervious as opposed to what we study for the stormwater. A lot of times the stormwater model we take in you know extra impervious from you know abutting lots and roadways so we make sure we size it correctly. Yeah, but it's not actually created by the project we just want to be able to handle it so that most likely that's that's generally [25:03] Chair (Planning Board Chair): where that happens but I'll take a look. Perfect, in reading James's note about the affordable housing I had the same I had the same thoughts on you know we're not going to have the town enforce this. I was also questioning whether a CPA paid by the developer sending a yearly rent roll actually confirms that the unit's meet income limits. I don't I'm not sure if that's really the how that's done but it was recommended that a third party enforces the Covenant not the town. I wholeheartedly agree we Are not going to tax our town anymore for a developer who's getting benefits from this. That was, that's just, that's my feeling on it. I concur with the town. [25:48] Town Attorney / legal counsel: And I'm aware of an entity that does that, so I can provide that information. Are they, [25:52] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): you know, is that someone's contracted by the applicant, a permit holder? Yes, it's just, it's, it's strange, it's kind of the same, a CPA paid by, paid by the applicant and a separate third party entity. I'm just, I just want to make sure that whatever we work into the [26:11] Town Attorney / legal counsel: agreement is, yeah, just acceptable. I think the point, like just the point being, because you, there needs to be a restrictive covenant, yeah, and then in that deed it's who is responsible for [26:22] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): enforcing it. I don't want it to be the town, I don't, yeah, right. Well, it's also tough because it's weird because it's something that we've never really, what, none of us have ever really done either. Yeah, it was something we're trying to say, okay, who's definitely going to be around in 30 years? Yeah, well, we know the town is going to be around in 30 years. Who knows, Neil. It was one of the things that came from the conversation in our office. We kind of went round and round about it and, yeah, in the end you know, kind of what we presented was it's kind of a first swing and we'll say, okay, what does the town settle on and what will they [26:53] Chair (Planning Board Chair): well, I mean, is that going to be around in 30 years to pay the CPA collect, sure, to cover the cost? Yeah, do we collect charity? Right, that's a great, that is a great idea. I'm writing that one [27:04] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): down. Yeah, so I don't know if that's, yeah, that's all kind of, yeah, because it should be in, you know, [27:09] Town Attorney / legal counsel: in the, in the town, there's a, the previous Oak Park had someone lined up and then it turned out that Honda actually was doing it because typically that, what I think when the law was written, in my conversations with people that know about the laws and stuff, it was written with HOD in mind as the one that forced in the covenant, so in situation, so Oak Park had a non-profit lined up to do that. I don't have a good answer for if that non-profit goes out of business in five years, what happens then, but or if the applicant were to move away or something, right. Well, the covenant is like if they start renting for higher rates, who has the ability to enforce it? Like they can take from the court or whatever. Yeah, so I mean, we still, I think we probably always could still reserve the right to do that as a, as a violation of the subdivision approval. [28:10] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Just who's reporting it to you, who's done this already, what towns have done this already, Neil? [28:15] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): None that I've actually gone through the process with. Yeah, that's one of the big things I think, a [28:20] Town Attorney / legal counsel: lot of, a lot of them are hard projects. Yeah, so HUD's the one we're enforcing the covenant minute, this [28:27] Chair (Planning Board Chair): gives me, this reminds me of 420 School Street when stuff just kind of like got in at the very beginning before there were a lot of regulations. This is what this feels [28:39] Town Attorney / legal counsel: like. Well, I think Berwick is in a unique position because we're in a Berwick, Kittery, South Berwick economic area, so what's affordable is skewed by those wages, so you can basically rent a market rate and still be considered what's affordable, but the catch is that it's rent restricted for, I think it's 30 years. Yeah, so who knows what happens in 10, 20, 30 years? [29:10] Chair (Planning Board Chair): No, I know that because I'm, I have rental properties myself, and for, yeah, for Section Eight, the, it's crazy the amount that they pay because of the area that we're in. So then the sidewalks are on here, are my favorite discussion to have, so it's parking requirements or sidewalks, and so did we, did he do a funded loo for the original Double G? I don't like, you did, I'll double check, but I don't think you did, boy, no sidewalks in this town, but I mean, I think, yeah, I remember having the discussion back then. There should be, there, I mean, there [29:50] Town Attorney / legal counsel: really should be. As there's a, like a, I think Pine Hill Road is a great candidate for sidewalks, I [29:57] Chair (Planning Board Chair): mean, it's, but the sidewalk is on the other side of the street on Pine, right? But it will be, I mean, it does end right there, it ends right at Terrace Drive, which is basically right where it ends, basically right before, I mean, if you put in a sidewalk across the street to continue the sidewalk up Pine Hill Road, yeah, it is right there, so I mean, that makes sense, I [30:21] Town Attorney / legal counsel: think, at least for the amount of frontage that's, you know, from on that side, and then yeah, equally [30:26] Chair (Planning Board Chair): amount you can do a crosswalk and yeah and that 'd be great that'd be great so the so the kids and people that are in the apartments can cross safely and get down to the ball fields i love that i think hear that neil i heard it topic for another day but i think sidewalks up to [30:46] Town Attorney / legal counsel: the Fox Ridge eventually is where I think those sidewalks are. Yeah, I'd love to see a lot of houses, [30:51] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): I'd love to see it, I'll be doing some engineering on that one. [30:56] Planning Board member: And a safe crosswalk. Are you volunteering? No. Volunteer is a tough word. [31:04] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Anybody have any feelings on any of that? [31:07] Planning Board member: I mean, definitely pro-sidewalks, as far up and down the town as we can get them. I did have a question on what a yearly rent roll entails, like what information is going to be listed in it. [31:20] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Well, the whole purpose of it is to make sure that there's a certain table of like how much per like a one-bedroom, a studio, there's a maximum you can rent it that's considered affordable. So it's the median income in the area, it's 30% of the income, so if your median income, yeah, there's a certain calculation about 30% of your salary, it can't be more than 30%. [31:51] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Have a question. Okay, so six of the units are supposed to be affordable, correct? Are they, are is it these six, or can, or is he able to move it around? Can he make six of the older units that are five to seven to ten years old now, that like, are these six units designated or what? And that [32:16] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): That we have not nailed down. [32:18] Chair (Planning Board Chair): I feel like we should nail that down. [32:19] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): I believe it has to be, you know, it's one of those things where you didn't want to limit it if one of them had to be, if it was open and that could, you know, if the rent in that one qualified for affordable, then it could be, you know, kind of moved to that unit if it was, if there were always, you know, the minimum number of available. [32:40] Chair (Planning Board Chair): But there's always six, no matter what. [32:43] Planning Board member: Is it six or is it eight? [32:44] Chair (Planning Board Chair): No, they're creating eight, but only six are affordable. [32:47] Planning Board member: James' thing says different. [32:49] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Oh, it's happened before. [32:53] Planning Board member: James, is there somebody who understands the rules of this? I'll give you an example of what, based on this conversation. You rent, you're at less than 30%, and you get a promotion. Now you're above 30%. Do you have to move? Does the developer have to find a different unit? We need to know. Well, no, it's, you can't pay more [33:19] Town Attorney / legal counsel: than 30, like the rent, it's not by the person, it's by the median area, so there's a, there's a table, not by the person. No, it's not by the person, there's a table. Oh, I thought it was by the person. It's not by the, no, it's, there's a table published of what the maximums are allowed to be, I believe. [33:40] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): There is a restriction on the income when you sign the income but that's only at the beginning of the contract right once I think if they make more money after that you can't suddenly raise the rates of that unit and make it not affordable. I don't think it's by person I thought that it goes better income it goes it goes but it goes I know that the maximum I think there is a minimum you know maximum income per person that yeah that utilizes them as far as the rent goes that's that's regulated by the overall you know cumulative rate income of the area yeah and then say the person starts out they're making don't call me on this one because I don't have the legalities in front of me but if this person there is making forty thousand dollars when they sign it they get a bonus to be 120 000 the developer can't say well now you're paying you know over that affordable because your income is not you know not congruent with it would be good to get it [34:38] Chair (Planning Board Chair): would be good it would be good to have that but I'm not sure I feel like they need to apply for [34:42] Planning Board member: the affordable housing they need to apply so yeah from what I understand and how that would be so is there an annual quality you know is there an annual like I don't know it's like I don't [34:55] Chair (Planning Board Chair): think it is I could be completely wrong so does it just mean that six units in there at one time have to have a max rent correct yeah but anyone can move into them yeah it's to create housing for people that don't make as much money as the media yeah that's what it's that's the purpose of this interpretation doesn't look at [35:23] Planning Board member: the individual's income so how is it create housing for somebody who needs it if we don't know what that person's income is. Isn't there an income threshold that they would have to meet? [35:32] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah, it'd be like the child care subsidy being like you have to keep 10 affordable seats, but they're not checking who's getting affordable seats. [35:39] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): Right, I think that's part of the rent roll for this process is an income check on these. But that's one of those things that's kind of beyond what I'm doing with it. [35:52] Planning Board member: We have some homework to do. [35:54] Chair (Planning Board Chair): We do have some homework to do on this, so that's good. This is a great, super good discussion. I saw the waiver requests. I mean, I don't think we're in any position to. We're just reviewing whatever the class right now. So I know you said you spoke with sewer. Yeah, and you're very fun conversation. It was a fine conversation. I want to put that on record. It was fine conversation. I was just surprised, that's all. Is there any consideration in the same thing for water pressure? Yeah, there that is in our performance standards. Yeah, but the water department hasn't called me and said like, I like you're not doing a good job here. No, I understand, but does the water department look at projects that with this large of an impact and approve them, or are they just, it's in our performance? Okay, yeah, yep, they sure [36:46] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): do for capacity and whatever. Again, that's one we reviewed with main water back in the day. We'll [36:54] Chair (Planning Board Chair): be back with that. Okay, before we come in for questions, Jeff, you got anything? I don't think so. All right, Niles, good. Wow, I'm tired. Not for sketch, not for sketch. Nobody else for sketch? [37:12] Planning Board member: Don't make a motion that we approve. No, we don't need anything. Oh, that's right, we're just in the [37:16] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): sketch. We're just looking, right? Is there, yeah, is there any, and we will be, I will, I'll say [37:27] Chair (Planning Board Chair): that we will also be looking at the technical and financial capacity, obviously pretty strong on this one as well, and then pulling the old, I'll be pulling the old project that was approved and making sure that was built per plan. Is it completed? That's what, that's what I would like to look at. I like to look at the conditions that were listed on there and everything there to make sure that was also completed per plan. Yeah, think sidewalks. Yeah, think sidewalks across the street. Yeah, if you want to put any on Bridge Street like the granite curve, you're going to [38:03] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): stop people from parking on the sidewalks first. Yeah, I like the idea of the sidewalks on Pine Hill. It's just such a tough, such a tough road for impossible. We have some on there. No, once you get past the geometry, [38:14] Chair (Planning Board Chair): oh, that's why you're an engineer. [38:18] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): A lot of trenches out there. [38:19] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Talk to somebody who knows about it. [38:24] Planning Board member: You also had a question on the stormwater, right? Yeah, [38:30] Chair (Planning Board Chair): that's, yeah, that's, I'll, I will look a little closer at that. I'll take a look, and it's very much like Neil to skirt right under that one acre mark, so that's why I want to. [38:42] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): It's a lot of people have to do. Yeah, it does ramp it up, but this one, we actually, even with the first, even the first phase of it, that one does have, you know, a filtration BMP that's out there, and this one's, it is, it's closer to the wetlands, so this one does have more, you know, more just filtration to the wetland, and it's a little, it's, it's, we did kind of try to get the majority of that upper one treated so it would help out in the event that, you know, there was an ever, every any other development. Could be able to handle both of them at the same time. Can I ask [39:22] Chair (Planning Board Chair): you, when you say wetland impact, can you tell us how the wetlands are being impacted and if there is any kind of crazy fill going on to amend the poorly drained soils, because I know that's been a [39:36] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): big discussion with this reversal as well. This one that was back, the one lot creation, yep, it was this, because similar to the to the previous application we were discussing, when this, when this lot was cut out, there was a portion of area up here that was amended to increase that density for this lot here. No soils need to be amended for the current proposed changes, just due to the fact that there was enough upland here that still met the density requirements for the new LD 2003 density regulations. So that portion of it, we don't have it. Okay. The close up here. Far as the wetland impacts, it's this down on this shelf here. We're kind of building this portion of the land up to get the building in, and it impacts this 4,100 square feet of wetland and right at the back of the upland dry area. And so that was something we had. We had DEP and we did have Army Corps look at it just to say in case that we think this contiguous wetland needed some of that Army Corps review. We discussed with them and they said, no, we just need a self-verification form so everyone's aware that you're doing it. And the DEP permit by rule, they said, you may not need it because it's under 4,300 square feet, But if you send it in we'd like to see it and review it so we did that for to just to get all the reviews. [41:10] Chair (Planning Board Chair): I had one other thing when I was reviewing your application, your list of a butters is a little inaccurate. And I emailed James, but I don't know if he reiterated brought it to you. Is that? The Wingate Lane condos that you have, like Wingate Lane LLC, which is the Association, but every one of those condos needs to be on that list of abutters so that they get properly noticed. I would hate to think those nine people don't get noticed. Thank you. Yeah, James, sad to say, I was wrong. Wow, what a man. I was just [41:48] Town Attorney / legal counsel: on camera. Thank you. Yeah, it says for rental housing occupancy of all the units designated affordable, the development will remain limited to households at or below 80 percent of the local median income at time of occupancy. Great, then there's no other certifications that required [42:07] Planning Board member: after that by the owner or by the renter. Yeah, not for that part of it. Okay, so does that [42:14] Chair (Planning Board Chair): also mean it can move between any units as long as it yes are affordable? Well, so that's, so my, I think one of my questions that I would like answered as we go through this process is, are those six units interchangeable, whatever, and how do, I don't know. I feel like, to me, it would be easier as a landlord to just designate these six, call it good. My other question was, yeah, how often, so maybe like, I don't know how often they are checking that income to make sure, like Niall said, if somebody gets a raise. I wonder if it is like a yearly process that they would have to reapply for this, because it's a special housing allowance, basically. [42:54] Town Attorney / legal counsel: I'll double check, but it just says time of occupancy. Yeah, so somebody could have like [42:58] Chair (Planning Board Chair): if they're a great tenant, like I have great tenants, and I'm just letting them live there, maybe it's when you re-sign your lease, maybe like if you sign a three-year lease, maybe at the [43:07] Planning Board member: early year, maybe at the end of the year, but in a sense it's logical. You want to create an incentive for somebody to do better, right, and what the last thing you want to do is to say, oh no, you can never go above this, right, because if you do, I'm going to throw you out. Yeah, so it would make sense to me to do it, but I would like to comply with the law. Yeah, just an old habit I've [43:28] Chair (Planning Board Chair): had over the years. Well, and give others the opportunity to also, you know, do better. I mean, [43:34] Planning Board member: that's, well, you know, it's not often enough we get these kind of programs, so when we do, we should [43:40] Town Attorney / legal counsel: make sure we help them to succeed. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, not to like, not accusing maliciousness, but [43:49] Planning Board member: If we are not situating those, like, these buildings are the ones, then at yearly rent increase they could choose to move. Which one is under that authority and bump the rate of an existing tenant who was living there under the assumption of being under the rent ceiling? [44:11] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): I see that. So we wouldn't be able to change an occupied. Right. We'd be able to change the affordable designation of an occupied unit. Right. [44:19] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah, interesting, something for us to all look into over the next few weeks together. We will learn together. So I got one more. Oh, please. I already put a plug for open space as well. [44:32] Town Attorney / legal counsel: To be a 15 open space requirement. Yeah, perfect. [44:39] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Opportunity with all those wetlands. That is a beautiful contiguous thing. I mean, it goes, I used to live over in that area and there is, if you are out there and you really pay attention and it's nice, there's like some streams and [44:51] Planning Board member: a lot of really nice stuff out there. You might want to convey the message that uncleared trails are sort of like dehydrated water. Just doesn't cut it. Just doesn't cut it. I'm sorry. [45:06] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Niles, you're the greatest. Anything else for Niels before he can go home? All right. All right. See you. Well, we see you. Do we need to do anything? Do we need to do, well, yeah, we need to plan a site walk November 5th at 4 p.m. Is it still going to be light out? That's a good question. We're getting, yeah, the time doesn't change until later. Okay. Well, the sun still goes down though. No. [45:41] Planning Board member: No, the change is the week before. The week before is the change. Yeah. I think four. Well, I mean, it's the Sunday. I think four is all right, typically, because I think we. [45:52] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Four. Like, we. I think we did four o'clock for. For the. Yeah. But we just never changed back. Yeah. Okay, that makes sense. [46:01] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Well, and then I think Megan requested four o'clock, too, right? [46:04] Planning Board member: I would need. No, I would need 445. Oh, yeah. To be able to make that. [46:07] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Okay, yeah. But, so I won't be able to make any of the winter meeting. Okay. Unfortunately, sidewalks. Yes, just because you don't come to our meetings. No, between daycare and work. Totally fine. So where are we going to meet? That is the good question, because there is, there a culprit right there. I mean, last, yeah, last time we met we met on the other side? [46:33] Town Attorney / legal counsel: What was the date? [46:35] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Oh, we met on Terrace, yeah. [46:37] Planning Board member: It's in the back of James. Okay. [46:39] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): No. I think that should be fine again. We meet over here. [46:43] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah, we're not walking through wetlands. [46:46] Neil Raposa (applicant representative, LRB Leasing LLC): It's actually not that wet right now, but it's pretty fucking patchy. [46:51] Planning Board member: Yeah. What's the date we're doing this? [46:53] Chair (Planning Board Chair): We're going to do November 5th at 4 p.m., and we're going to meet on Terrace Drive. Did you get that, you too? Terrace Drive, okay. Yeah, we got it. Okay, 4 p.m. Oh, 4 p.m. And that was November 5th. Thank you. All right, we're done with you. Thank you, Neil. See you soon. Terrace. We're moving on to policies and procedures. [47:43] Town Attorney / legal counsel: I took out any mentions of anything that's already in the ordinance. [47:48] Chair (Planning Board Chair): I read it. It looked fine to me. [47:50] Town Attorney / legal counsel: It'd be a wholesale replacement of the previous one. So that's why I don't. [47:55] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Great. Has everybody reviewed it? Yeah. Yeah. I did, Jeff. You look, you're good at that. I'll let you take your time. I just didn't know if you reviewed it ahead of time. It's the very end of that. Of course, I just like restacked everything. [48:11] Planning Board member: You can also clarify we're good. A quorum of four is illegal, just to bring back some pleasant memories. It is illegal. I am correct, James. Wait, what? Under the land use ordinance, a quorum of [48:29] Town Attorney / legal counsel: four is illegal. Yeah, Bill is just like, yeah, there's half plus to the nearest [48:40] Chair (Planning Board Chair): full person. Is that the new math they're teaching you in school these days? Thank you. [48:51] Planning Board member: Now we have a much bigger name. Yeah, we do. This is the nearest full person. The nearest full person [48:58] Chair (Planning Board Chair): in terms of entity and not in terms of physicality. Got it. If you have anything else you'd like to add, [49:07] Planning Board member: very interested in this. I feel like there's a whole ending at this point, and I'm happy to stop. [49:12] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah, great. I move that we approve these amended planning board policies and procedures that were proposed at this meeting. Okay, and I would like to just say effective immediately, effective immediately. Any further discussion? This is further discussion. Okay, Megan, you want to discuss this? Daniel? No. Okay, I don't neither. So all in favor? No post. All right, that passes unanimously. There is no public here for a second public comment. Informational items. I don't know [50:03] Planning Board member: where this goes. Can we discuss? So we allowed to discuss the other projects [50:09] Chair (Planning Board Chair): that aren't getting finished? Yeah, better not on the agenda. We can write. Sure. But, yeah. Like, yeah. [50:17] Planning Board member: Name a project. The one that the town's been in court with for... [50:23] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Navina Estates, Halflinger Lane. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We can discuss that, right? I mean... Or it is on... Is it... It's not being... It's not in front of a judge right [50:30] Planning Board member: now, right? Is it likely to come back before us? I don't know. I have no idea. But that... What happens with that may affect my decision on whether that people [50:41] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Get anything else. Oh, I think there was a. There was a ruling on that, wasn't there? I was told that was already. Yeah, there's already a judge, right? I knew that when I was on the select board, but yeah, it's not paved. Yeah, that's correct. I didn't know that the final pavement wasn't on there. Nothing's been done. Yes. It's kind of sitting there. What was the, final results of the final building? You got those solar lights, right? Yeah, they instead of the [51:12] Town Attorney / legal counsel: straight lights and they're not putting granite fine and associated with it and he was able to [51:19] Chair (Planning Board Chair): keep the curving and not too slow. Yeah, so no granite curving, it was just the asphalt curving and the solar lights, not the nice hardwired lights that were. But was he not given a date [51:32] Planning Board member: to get paving and everything done? [51:34] Town Attorney / legal counsel: So I've had recent discussions with him, and you can take it for a grain of salt. He's assured me, and I have no reason for him to think he's just blowing smoke to me. He'd have no reason to say to me, James, I have every intention of paving. [51:55] Planning Board member: Yeah, but we're in October. [51:56] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah, the plants are going to close. Winter's here. [51:59] Planning Board member: I mean, how are they going to get plowed again? [52:01] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Mention potentially putting money in escrow if it doesn't get paid this year. I have a question [52:07] Chair (Planning Board Chair): about that being someone who's plowed previously and knows that paved curbing is essentially temporary curbing when it comes winter. Listen, we've already had this discussion, okay? Yeah, is was that what because I missed that, was that initially proposes, it was, it is in the approved plan that there was granite curbing and they did. Yeah, they just did asphalt curbing and didn't finish the project. So is there any recourse from the town when this, it's a private road, okay, so it does right, the town has not adopted that road. No, we cannot until it meets [52:47] Planning Board member: town standard. Okay, perfect, okay. Yeah, but they're looking to do other things in town and [52:53] Chair (Planning Board Chair): I'm just, yeah, no, I totally, I would, I didn't know that, so thank you for putting that on the radar because this applicant has a few, I mean, we can't talk about the other applications, but there are now, you know, two full things in front of us and they and one of them hasn't been completed per the plan and granted it's something very minimal, it's creating trails, but yeah, that's, yeah, that goes back to it's disconcerting because it's somebody who demonstrates a history, but would that go back to the ability we just discussed of not approving anything until those standards are met from the previous applications. I've, that's, I would defer to [53:33] Planning Board member: the, I mean, I think James has to, yeah, check with the attorney, but yes, I would think that, yes, that [53:39] Chair (Planning Board Chair): perfectly. There's already a history, right? So, you know, I'm not sure that it's documented though, that we can do that. If you know, that's the thing, is that in other towns, and I've brought this up to James, I know in certain towns in like Massachusetts, there is, you can have a contractor that's not in good standing with the town, and that means that they have failed to, you know, you have a state go through this whole process, have a stamp plan, didn't produce what they promised they would produce, they are now a contractor not in good standing, and as such they cannot bring anything else, or they can bring it, but they like, they're not getting until that's fixed, until that's, yeah, until they're in good standing, they make good on it. That makes sense, but we don't have that as far as I know. We don't have any kind of ability to do [54:24] Town Attorney / legal counsel: that, so we need to defer to an attorney. Yeah, so you have two different LLC's, so when it comes to the develop, that developer is under two different LLC's, that I don't know for sure, but do you know where there's a, like I mentioned [54:43] Planning Board member: earlier, the common contractor, even that's ridiculous. Could we ask the [55:00] Chair (Planning Board Chair): attorney if it's based on actual like ownership of the application versus LLC? [55:06] Town Attorney / legal counsel: See, because that gets really great if, Phil can write a memo or maybe even be here for the [55:11] Chair (Planning Board Chair): next meeting, it also creates a precedent that other, that other developers from god only knows where can take advantage of people. I mean, I'm not saying that people are out there trying to take advantage of little loopholes and all these LD 2003 whatever it is, but they are just like they did with the marijuana before we got our standards under control. They did the same exact thing out there on School Street, and now that's an uncontrollable project that always reeks of marijuana. It's like it is a slippery slope, and we're creating a precedent if anybody can just go open an LLC, come get something approved, half-ass it, and then go on and do it again. That's crazy. [55:52] Planning Board member: I mean, if you created a separate LLC for every project, that essentially becomes a meaningless provision. Yeah, and that can't be what the town meant, so there has to be some other way to look at it. [56:04] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Well, it brings in their, the sentence goes on the contractors, the consultants, and things like that, so it encompasses all of it, which I think that gives the planning board legs to either deny or a condition of approval. [56:22] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Furthermore, if somebody still has to pave a whole subdivision that they promised us how many years ago, I mean, that's been built out for quite a few years and hasn't been fully paved but has the money to retain civil consultants for two other separate projects that doesn't make sense to me it shows poor financial capacity responsibility yeah i mean i know how much i know how much these guys charge it's not cheap i just i don't know it's that's that's super frustrating i appreciate you bringing it up because i wasn't aware of that i [56:54] Planning Board member: thought i mean i know it's not a town road but they are town citizens and they're yeah not happy No, they shouldn't be I don't know they shouldn't I'm sure they were told it was gonna be paved there have a right to know [57:04] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah, the final the final coding goes on when all the houses are done. It's supposed to be final pavement I mean they were supposed to have granite curving and really nice lights, too That's unfortunate [57:15] Planning Board member: Right. Yeah next item. Yes, we've had to compromise on the you know on the conditions of approval the lighting curbing all of that. So what does that say about financial capacity, too? [57:28] Chair (Planning Board Chair): but yet we've got you know two brand new buildings that are in front of us to go up plus what about all the what about all the paving for this that's going to happen is that going to get done well i'm not sure yeah i get it but i'm just saying like you know in theory it's whatever [57:51] Planning Board member: do we have the authority to put restrictions on an occupancy permit that if a condition hasn't been met here then you can't go ahead and give an occupancy permit we can make a condition like that but I it's taking it all the way up to the very end yeah yes I think so okay I think so I think I think [58:22] Town Attorney / legal counsel: you could yeah say if there is a demonstrated owner developer issues with a consultant issue with second capacity to make a condition of approval a building permit will not be issued [58:35] Planning Board member: until that violation is resolved in their name or any llc they are associated established under [58:42] Chair (Planning Board Chair): there yeah otherwise like we're just being taken advantage of like what a laughing especially with the big changes coming down from the state of the big developments being allowed yeah it's [58:51] Planning Board member: Going to be interesting. So I have two quick things, if I may. I know, don't give me that turtles because [58:58] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Real Clear Politics has turned us all into turtles lately. I can't wait to see what we are [59:03] Planning Board member: this week. Go for it. I want to be a Canadian goose, just saying. I, this actually just came up when Jeff brought up his question about can we talk about it, is so like public comment and in some cases informational items, there are some things we can talk about and some things we can't. And I know that we can't talk about things on the agenda for a public comment. Is it also true that we can't allow someone to talk about an application that's in process? Correct. So I'm wondering if we should say that because people do come in and they want to talk about something and we stop them and say we don't have the applicant here so we can't talk about that. It almost seems like when we say a public comment is so you can talk about anything not on the agenda, we don't really mean that. We mean not on the agenda or currently, yeah, in process. So it's more of just a, definition of what the public comment is a little more specifically. Well so the question is do we really mean anything within our jurisdiction? Well yeah, that falls in front the planning, something in process, not an appeal, not a public meeting to me and within our [1:00:20] Chair (Planning Board Chair): jurisdiction, right, to me any, when I say agenda, and granted nobody else is in my brain, lucky for you guys, when I say agenda, I'm like, to me the agenda is anything that's open is on our agenda somewhere like that. We should probably say, we should probably say that because everybody else doesn't understand that. Yeah, so I'm sure they think it's just this agenda. Yeah, okay. [1:00:43] Planning Board member: The other thing is, last meeting we talked in informational items about upgrading the, or updating the shoreland zoning map. Is there a process that needs to happen for that to happen? Because I'm guessing, and it's not a criticism, that nothing's been done. [1:01:01] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Yeah, nothing's been done. It's a matter of, I got to check our, I will, I will. I would, I will start to talk with our map contractor, you know, blowing smoke. It's hard [1:01:16] Chair (Planning Board Chair): to get him to say I will. I love maps, I love maps, accurate, a little, a little busy, yes, I understand [1:01:26] Town Attorney / legal counsel: so I apologize for not doing anything since last meeting, but you can actually email me and check, just make sure, hey have you talked to our mapper yet? Yep, I will. I do think it's important and squeaky wheel. I would actually love to work on our maps. Okay, please do poke me and then one last [1:01:48] Planning Board member: Thing about that, so the town has maps, the state has maps, the government has maps, yeah. And oftentimes they don't all jive. There might be restrictions based on a town, or based on the state, or based on the government. Who has precedent? Does it go top down that government general rule is federal? Government is superior, supreme, but they can say we're not okay, so let's just talk down and say control unless they say otherwise. It's them if, but they can say in this case we'll defer to the state or to the town, right? So I bring it up because I know that there are cases where the state might have a map that has a restriction on it for some reason, but the town doesn't share that same restriction. And hypothetically, let's just say there's a violation going on, the town really has no teeth, or do they, because there's a state map? That's a great question, I know [1:02:53] Chair (Planning Board Chair): this is why they turned you into a turtle, by the way. I also know you love your turtles. Yeah, I love my thing to do, it was actually, I don't know [1:03:04] Town Attorney / legal counsel: like I don't know, I know like our shoreline zoning pulls in different state maps and then it becomes our shoreline zoning. So I don't know if there's a process where it has to be pulled, the state data, and then their shoreline zone is a shoreline zone, or if there's something that supersedes it. I will, I can't look into that to try to get to the bottom of that. I'll include it in my email and to answer, great, and to, or maybe three separate emails, but we get to know for future, yeah, mapping like what data sources gets pulled in to become part of our show. [1:03:55] Planning Board member: Yeah, I mean, that's what we're always doing is trying to improve communication, clarity. [1:04:00] Town Attorney / legal counsel: Yeah, and at some point, to have one map you can go on, you can click on layers and stuff. Correct. [1:04:07] Chair (Planning Board Chair): On the GIS would be even better. [1:04:09] Planning Board member: Well, that'd be cool. That exists on the state level. Yeah. We're getting there. Yep. We're getting there. Great. Great. Great. Great. I'm done. All right. Anybody else? I have a couple of announcements for your informational, and that just involves the code enforcement hours. We have new walk-in hours. We're not open all day, you know, till close anymore. So our walk-in hours are now 8 a.m. to 11 a.m. all other times are by appointment we will be closed next week on Wednesday which is October the 7th and on Thursday the October the 8th and that is just due to staff training good you guys can use all the training you can get over yes we can thank you go ahead you look like you want to say something so i just want to give an update [1:05:00] Town Attorney / legal counsel: On the ATP general biological, I've been trying to track down a third-party review. Yes, I, we, Terry actually helped find one today. It sounds like their review will be mostly focused on the explosion part of it. There's another component of it that haven't really been really able to track down. I also wanted to, I think it probably makes sense to have them come back on the 15th for a check-in meeting, but the third party review probably wouldn't be ready for that. Yeah, also the Two Sisters has [1:05:38] Chair (Planning Board Chair): submitted their responses. Oh good, where are they? Are they on the site? They will [1:05:43] Town Attorney / legal counsel: be on the website by some point next week. Okay, typically one week in advance of the meeting. Do we know when they'll be on the next? They're tracking for October 15th. Oh good, so I'm not sure if it makes sense if we want to preemptively schedule it for the auditorium, something to think about. [1:06:01] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Maybe I can talk to Nicole about October 15th. Okay, I won't be here guys, I'm sorry in advance. Oh, I'm always here. [1:06:12] Town Attorney / legal counsel: This is the next regulated schedule. So if we have Two Sisters and an ATP, I don't think we'll have the same time. [1:06:20] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Niles can't handle it. [1:06:21] Planning Board member: No,, no, not the same meeting, please. Okay. [1:06:24] Chair (Planning Board Chair): That is the two most highly contentious things going on. [1:06:28] Planning Board member: But you did say that ATP is just coming in to give us an update. They're not presenting anything. Is that correct? [1:06:34] Town Attorney / legal counsel: It would just be a check. [1:06:35] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Do they have an update for us? [1:06:37] Town Attorney / legal counsel: I think they do, yeah, they have some things to update. Okay, I mean I can, I can talk to the chair if that's what the, just to as things as the agenda develops, I agree with you, I prefer not to have [1:06:52] Chair (Planning Board Chair): I prefer not to have the same thing especially if the topic is explosives. Well it matters [1:06:59] Planning Board member: on how we prepare too, I mean that would be we need to prepare for two, you know, right, yeah. [1:07:05] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah, it is a lot on the board to prepare. There's a lot of reading. We do spend a lot of time on this, believe it or not. [1:07:12] Planning Board member: And there is a lot of, yeah, I agree with Niles. What is the Two Sisters on? [1:07:16] Chair (Planning Board Chair): The gravel pit off Redland Road that we already had a... Yeah, I wasn't held on yet. [1:07:21] Town Attorney / legal counsel:...fiction before. And there's all kinds of other things also ongoing, too, so there's other applications, so we're busy. [1:07:28] Chair (Planning Board Chair): We are busy. I love it. I love being busy. [1:07:30] Planning Board member: Jeff, for context, I have recused myself from the Two Sisters one, so there will at least be one open space. [1:07:35] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Yeah and I won't be at the reason he lives in the neighborhood and technically I'm part of a [1:07:42] Planning Board member: Joint parcel ownership of a piece of land that is affected by the potential noise from there due to it's, I had to dig in deep and figure out like what was going on, you did the right thing or accusing Yourself, I think, I agree, so then we have to make sure that the meeting is on at night when Megan's here, right, because if you're, you said you're not going to be here, right, but we have [1:08:08] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Job, but we have, otherwise we have enough, okay, and three makes a quorum, yeah, three makes it, okay [1:08:12] Planning Board member: Perfect, yep, yeah, good, yeah, I didn't miss the Select Board, I don't anticipate missing here [1:08:20] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Familiarize yourself with that particular one, go online and watch the, watch the public hearing [1:08:25] Planning Board member: And the meetings must watch TV, what was the public hearing, what day was that, do you know two sisters yeah i could always i could always email you can you catch jeff up just so he's up to speed on it 's pretty technical for that one as well yeah so i recommend having the minutes while you're watching okay yeah it was a long meeting it's a lot of watching the news was there [1:08:50] Chair (Planning Board Chair): Channel 13 was at the meeting, yeah, and the site walk and the sidewalk, yeah, it was funny, we were on TV, it was actually a good, it was actually a really good meeting though, it was, I had a great [1:09:00] Planning Board member: I had a good time, me too, the public seemed to appreciate it, I'll send you the packet, a link to the zoo meeting, everything, okay, thank you, thanks Terry, okay, I move we adjourn, second, all in favor [1:09:14] Chair (Planning Board Chair): I'll let you guys vote this week, last week I was just