China Planning Board Tables Tower Application, Sets October 13 Hearings

[0:20] Chair: If you're the sign in, please. Do we [0:34] Speaker B (unidentified): have to all sign in? What's that? Do we have to all sign in? [0:38] Chair: Oh, yes. And forgive me. Yeah. Anybody here for the public care, actually, any other reason, please sign them. And I think that's what we're going to do. [0:51] Speaker B (unidentified): You know, so that's, you know, I'm ready. That's on. [1:35] Speaker C (unidentified): And Bruce is on, and Tony's on. You're good? Good evening. [1:47] Chair: I'd like to call the September 22nd China Flaming Board meeting to order. Please sign in. I pledge allegiance [1:57] Speaker B (unidentified): 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. [2:11] Speaker C (unidentified): All right, thank you. [2:12] Chair: We'll do a quick roll call. Tony Wall? Here. And just for the record, Tony isn't able to be here in person tonight, so Milton Dudley, co-chair, filling in his chair tonight. Dwayne Drummond is unable to be here tonight. Peter Nelson? Here. Bruce Fitzgerald here virtually. Hi, Bruce, and Jennifer Chase. Okay, so we've got a bunch of stuff to go through tonight. Before I open the public hearing, I'd like to give a quick overview of really kind of the roads, rules of the road, but also what we can and can't do as a the planning board. So first and foremost, when you have a comment, please give your full name for the record so that we can get that into the minutes. The other thing is I will ask the applicant to give just a brief overview of the project before we open the public hearing. That will not be a give and take of questions back and forth between the audience and the applicant. Once the applicant has finished his presentation, we'll open the hearing, the public hearing, and I would just caution folks that we are only as a as a planning board we look the application according to what is written for ordinances, not according to what might be nice, what we'd like to have, what would be good next year. We are truly a review board that looks at the application only in respect to how it meets or fails to meet the ordinances. So having said that, I'd like to open the hearing with a quick full review of the power project. Thank you, sir. And would you identify yourself for the record? Absolutely. [4:29] Speaker B (unidentified): Absolutely. My name is Mark Roberts. I'm here on behalf of Harmony Towers, Harmony Towers Gateway LLC. And so the application before you is for a communications tower on Department Hill Road as identified in the application materials. materials. I will be brief, I guess, and then maybe we can talk more specifically about what you want me to go through and review some of the approval standards, specifically that kind of thing, but starting at a very high level. The project is on Farming Jail. Farming Towers is an infrastructure provider. They build towers on behalf of the wireless carriers and this particular project is triggered by a need from Verizon Wireless who are looking for essentially an alternative power solution on the hill. There is a power up there currently. This particular project is on the abutting parcel. So the project would be a 195 foot communications tower that's the type that is permitted under the tower ordinance it's a little over 200 feet off the final road also in compliance with the setback requirements and for folks that maybe are interested in their community we did have a balloon flying today and yesterday in the tower location as required in the ordinance just to give people a chance to see if they would be able to see the future tower from their property from the key line marks that kind of stuff it seems like that went off relatively good weather [6:32] Chair: that's just that's a good cursory overview any before we open up the public hearing any questions from the board? Peter, did anybody? Tony, Bruce, any questions? [6:47] Tony: Not at this time. [6:49] Chair: All right. Thanks, guys. Members of the public, please, let's hear from you. Well, let me back up a second. Is there anybody here for the public hearing? I know we've got other things on the agenda you guys have a separate you guys have a separate yes sir are you here for the public hearing you're not anything anyone would like to say anything [7:21] Speaker B (unidentified): i can say it's going next to our house there's a coward i don't have a problem with it i mean [7:26] Chair: it's already out there and you are sure thank you all right well that being the case All of your public and to close and reopen the regular schedule. When we were meeting. I have just gotten because I got my back this afternoon you have the condition of use. And I had another specific question for the African based on. for climates in 7.1 or 7.2. Let's see here. Specifically, for your purposes, I'm on 7.2 criterion C, designed for co-location. And it says a new wireless telecommunication facility and related equipment must be designed and constructed to accommodate expansion for future co-location of at least three additional wireless telecommunication facilities for providers. The response is it will be designed for three, which doesn't meet the criteria. [8:47] Speaker B (unidentified): Yes. So I'm glad you brought that up. So the specific reason that we designed the three is that currently in the marketplace, there are only three wireless carriers that are active, AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile. Whereas 10 years ago, 15 years ago, certainly when the ordinance was drafted, there were several more. You had Nextel and Sprint that have now gone away, essentially been conglomerated into T-Mobile. So since the project is essentially a cost saving measure, You know, one of the ways that we can economize is to build the tower for, you know, what we currently see as the potential marketplace. You know, in the future, it could be reinforced to add more capacity. And so that's why we designed it for understanding that, you know, that's what the rhetoric of the code says. So, you know, that's something that I can certainly. [9:44] Chair: I don't know how the board members feel, particularly with the insight that it could be reinforced for more capacity later. I would be inclined to see that as our huge hiccup. Tony, Bruce, did you catch that? Any comments on that? [10:04] Speaker E (unidentified): Not on that specifically. My question about co-location just had to do with if any of our emergency services wanted to co-locate on that tower, would that be possible for them? So if one of the fire departments needed to put a radio antenna up there, would that be something that would be entertained? [10:23] Speaker B (unidentified): Of course, yeah. No, we would always be happy to entertain accommodating municipal emergency services if there's a need. [10:35] Speaker E (unidentified): And I don't know if that's needed at this time. That's maybe a conversation that we have outside of this meeting, but it was just something I thought of when I was reviewing the package. [10:45] Speaker B (unidentified): Yeah, of course. Yeah. I mean, that kind of equipment typically isn't a significant structural burden compared to a, you know, a full wireless carrier install. So there's, there's typically, you know, both space vertically and also structural capacity for those standard installations. And we're always happy to do it. [11:06] Speaker E (unidentified): Yeah. It's more about the hut and yeah. Cause you're right. Putting the stick antenna up there is not a big deal, but will there be room in the hut and that sort of thing? [11:15] Speaker B (unidentified): Yeah. So the initial compound build out is a 50 by 50, which is more than enough room for, you know, oral precarious and then some. So that shouldn't be a problem. [11:27] Speaker E (unidentified): Okay, thanks. [11:29] Tony: And Mill, this is Tony. I recognize that these ordinances were written 17 years ago. So there's obviously been changes. So that is not a major concern of mine with the co-location. I do want to ask Mark, though, about, I think that we need to discuss as the board, the current ordinance is 48 hours for the balloon. And we did two six-hour trials, Monday and Tuesday. I think I'm actually I'm actually fine with that because there's already a tower there, but I do think that we need to make a motion that we did accept the two six-hour days versus what is written in the ordinance as 48 hours. [12:20] Chair: And is that your motion as we speak to be seconded? Yes. Yes. Yes. Good plan, Tony. Any discussion on Tony's motion? Hearing none. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you. Thank you, Tony. I appreciate that. I had that highlighted as well. So that will square it away. So we've got the applications completed. We have held the public hearing. Normally, we would run right into the conditional use application and go through the criteria there but I am going to entertain a motion to table it to next meeting because I only got this only as we sat down so I haven't had a [13:13] Speaker B (unidentified): chance to review it so I suspect no one else has either. I move that we table it for next meeting. [13:21] Chair: I'll second that. Okay all in favor? [Speaker E (unidentified): Aye. Aye.] So sorry to throw one more meeting delay at you, but you're really traveling in pretty good shape. I don't see any hiccups. We just really needed time to look at your responses on the condition use [13:44] Speaker B (unidentified): application for next meeting. Understood. And is there a, do we know a date for next meeting? Is it October 13th? We're [14:02] Chair: glad to hear that. Thanks, Harry, for tonight. And thanks once again. We appreciate it, Matt. The next thing on the agenda is an application from Sean Bogue for a part-time mechanics garage at 238 Virgo Road. So the first thing I will ask, is the application complete? [14:33] Speaker C (unidentified): As far as I can tell, it is complete. [14:42] Speaker B (unidentified): So Tony [14:46] Chair: And Bruce, do you have access to the Request to meet with the planning board application? Yes. Okay, then I would entertain a motion to say that the application is complete. Don't move. Second. Any discussion? Nope. Hearing that all in favor? Aye. So the second thing in the application process like this is a discussion about whether or not there would be a public hearing. So do I have a motion from a member on that to open the discussion? Please don't move. Which way to open discussion? Move to either have a public hearing or not have a public hearing. Do you move to have a public hearing? I do. We have enough information yet to determine that? We need to have the discussion. We need to get a motion on the floor. [15:52] Tony: I can do that. I make a motion to have a public hearing on John Hogue's application from an auto body shop. Do we have a second? [16:04] Chair: Any discussion? Well, I'll start with some discussion because it's right up the street from me, and I know there's stuff going on already there. Have. My only concern, not a personal one, but one that I think the public may have, is the present use doesn't generate any real traffic other than the owner-operator's truck in and out. And opening a garage at that space would obviously, however, much more farm increase the traffic. So based on that, I would think that we would at least give the butters and whatnot an opportunity to hear what's going on before we go through the [16:56] Tony: conditions. And Milt, that was my thought too, because the Kennebec disposal is a little bit different than an auto body or a mechanic shop. Up? Yeah. [17:10] Chair: Isn't it a big hiccup, but just another step in the process? Oh, sorry. That's all right. I'm going to get the wrong. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor of holding a public hearing? Aye. Opposed? Would we be able to get information out and actually [17:45] Speaker B (unidentified): schedule so it would be scheduled for October 13th as well? Okay. [17:52] Chair: So on October 13th we'll have a public hearing. Sometimes it generates a lot, sometimes it generates nothing. It's just neighbors and community get an opportunity to come in and poke around a little bit and ask questions and that you know may promote the board to ask them further questions on the application but that's that's it's a good process so I guess we will see you folks back on the on the 13th. [18:31] Speaker B (unidentified): Thank you, Fijian. All [18:47] Chair: right, we'll leave them right on. [18:50] Speaker B (unidentified): Did you want to table these for next time? For the minutes. [18:55] Chair: The minutes? Yes. Thank you, I forgot those at the beginning. Oh, yeah. Do I have a motion for approval of the minutes? Move that the minutes for the ANCOVA, August 25th meeting be approved as printed. Second. Discussion? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Thank you. Aye. Now we'll look at you guys. Sorry about that. We have an application for us, preliminary plans for a four-lot subdivision on the Danforth and Pleasant View Ridge Road in China. [19:57] Speaker B (unidentified): So I assume you are Kirk and Judy. Yes. See how quick I am. Oh yeah, just like a small crowd. Yeah. What can you tell us about what you'd like to do? Once again, we're basically taking 19.88 acres and we're going to subdivide it into four lots. Three will be off the dam pole road, each of them will have 255 feet of product. The other one will be off Pleasant New Ridge Road, we'll have I think it's 306 feet of frontage. We've gotten all the driveway permits. We've had all the soils, the septic system designed. Yeah, quite a full package. All the surveying has been completed by Boynton Associates. Scott, we need to find [20:52] Chair: That you had everything complete. So I'm entertaining an application to find the request to meet with the Planning Board. Application is complete. So moved. [21:10] Tony: Do we have a second? Seconded. [21:13] Speaker E (unidentified): Second. Thank you. I'll let you have that one, Tony. [21:18] Chair: Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Aye. Okay. Okay. So the next step is, do I have a motion to open a discussion? Do I have a motion to have a public hearing? I move that we have a discussion. No,. Got to move to have the public hearing. Oh, move to have the public hearing. Second. Any discussion? Nope. I would just leave that I think it's a big enough subdivision that it would warrant a public hearing. Doesn't mean it's going to delay you much, but it just gives, and I'm sure that your friends and neighbors know what's going on anyway, but it gives everybody an opportunity to come in and be part if they so choose. Any other discussion? [22:21] Speaker E (unidentified): Yeah, as I was reviewing, I appreciate that it was very complete with the soil samples and all that. I didn't see an actual map of what the new lot lines would look like and maybe I missed it in the package but I saw the total the total parcel of land but I didn't see how it would be broken up into the four lots. Yeah I did see that. Okay then I missed it. Yeah it's yeah it's [22:54] Speaker C (unidentified): It's the one with the contour lines on it. [23:00] Speaker E (unidentified): I'll go back and look. It's not that important to me. It's not a showstopper at all. I was just curious as to what the final design would look like. [23:13] Tony: And I have a quick question on the septic design. I see for lots three and four. Am I missing something? I don't see one and two. [23:21] Speaker C (unidentified): So one and two were already approved because you don't need to have subdivision approval for the first two. You'd only need it for three and four and moving on. [23:31] Tony: Okay, thank you. Other [23:42] Speaker B (unidentified): discussion? We already voted on public hearing, voted on it. We'll have the [23:48] Chair: public hearing, that takes care of that. So public hearing for you folks will be on the 13th as well. At that time we should be able to hold the public hearing, go through your responses to the criteria, and hopefully get your score. That way next year... what is that? What is needed from us at that point though? Turn out, I'm just, it's the same [24:19] Tony: thing that we brought to you to the right. We'll have the final so we'll [24:23] Chair: probably have the final stuff already if you know, because they are in the process, they're doing out the full scale stuff, so we could bring that to you. I just [24:33] Speaker C (unidentified): WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T NEED ANYTHING MORE. OKAY, AND I'LL TAKE CARE OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE SO [24:39] Speaker B (unidentified): YOU GUYS JUST SHOW UP. THANK YOU. NOTHING FROM THE APPLICANTS BUT A WHOLE BUNCH OF WORK FOR NICK. [24:48] Chair: HE'S BEEN, HE'S BEEN TAKING CARE OF US. BEFORE WE MOVE ON, YOU'VE JOINED US. IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR POINT OF INTEREST TONIGHT? YOU JUST [25:01] Adam Jendro: want to see how the planning board operates? Or no, I'm here because I, my name is Adam Jendro. I spoke with Nick through email about food sovereignty act that was enacted in the state of Maine in 2017, which allows municipalities to opt in with that ordinance. It provides local farmers the ability to sell their produce and their baked goods or pickles or things like that, relish, directly to consumers. That's something that China has not opted in for yet. So I wanted to present that to you all and see if that's something we can start pushing forward. [25:43] Chair: Well, I need to know more about [25:46] Adam Jendro: before i signed on the course yeah so it's title seven chapter 8f is the constitution it's in the state constitution essentially i mean i sent it to nick i don't know if he has the ability to pull it up on the computer to show it 's not very robust but it is something that Maine, the state of Maine opted in for putting in the constitution because we have 9% of our food is imported out of state. There's three other states that have food sovereignty ordinance or acts in their constitutions. It's a way for strengthening our community to be to be self-reliant, which I think is very important given where we are right now. That's why I moved to Maine was to become self-reliant myself on my own farm. As it basically is allowing people to farmers to sell their produce or their goods directly to a consumer without state intervention of inspection or licensure. [27:14] Chair: So how did you determine that we're the appropriate board to champion this? I got to say. Whose laugh does this go with? Okay, well, here's what I'd say tonight. I'm intrigued because we have so much on our plate. Understand that if you want our attention you'll have to spoon feed us, but it sounds like you have started the process. I'm sure Nick will share that with the members and we can bring that up as a discussion point at another meeting and see what interest level there is. So love to have you come every time if you feel like and we'll we'll take a look at what it is you're talking in the vote. George, no promises where it's going, but I'm intrigued to see what it is. Peter, my question would be is, what are you looking, what's the result you're looking for? What do you want to have happen? You're coming before the planning board. What do you want to have happen? [28:13] Adam Jendro: I would like for China to adopt the food sovereignty order that the state has put out for municipalities to opt in for. I currently give my goods to my neighbors. I produce tomatoes pumpkins zucchinis things like that. I barter and trade with other community members. Right now we have Canadians and out-of-towners that come through our forgive me I'm gonna [28:45] Chair: Interrupt you because you're lobbying on behalf of your position. The question is what's the end result, what are you looking for us to do? And the result is you're looking for the board for this board I'm assuming to champion and put it forward to the town to be voted on to the select. So okay so we understand basically what you're looking for. We'll take a peek at and I'm sure if this interest generated we'll reach out if you don't happen to be here we'll follow up with if there's that level of Interest okay and it sounds like there may be [29:24] Tony: Can I just say something real quick? I think it might be it he may need to if he's looking to get that sovereign food thing as part of the town approved he might have to go in front of the select board and make his presentation to them also. They're the governing body. I mean we can say yeah he came to us and we agree but they're the governing body also just [29:56] Chair: my two cents yeah and that's kind of where i was at tony if it's going to be a two-step process and we're backed up with stuff already why would we take that on only to pass it on and have this gentleman go through the same process with the select board but i'm still interested we'll We'll kick it around next time, and if we feel that maybe you're better served and it's a more streamlined process to go to the select board directly, we'll share that back with you. [30:30] Adam Jendro: Okay, that sounds good. [30:31] Chair: I honestly really appreciate your time. [30:33] Adam Jendro: I didn't know, and I asked Nick, and so Nick said maybe we could talk about it here as something that people might be interested in. [30:39] Chair: No, 100%. No, it's a good place to start. [30:42] Speaker C (unidentified): And I have not had a chance to look into it as far as if it requires an actual ordinance or if which we may or may not have to either adopt right whatever we need to do, but at least to explore that option. That's why I encouraged him to come to tonight's meeting. Great to [31:00] Chair: punch that out. Good, thank you for that. Well, let's go on to code enforcement. [31:09] Speaker C (unidentified): thank you thank you we're looking at it yes i mean it 's all it's extremely busy we've put in a lot of septic systems this year and it doesn't look like it's slowing down anytime soon. I don't have any more applications waiting in the wings that I'm aware of yet, so once we get through these hopefully the end of October and November slows down a little bit. [31:43] Chair: Two minor things, if I could ask you to be a liaison back to the clerk's office. Sure. When you get plans, 11 by 17, and when we get multi-page applications, number. [32:02] Speaker C (unidentified): I see. Yeah, that was what they had submitted. [32:08] Chair: No, I understand they just printed it the way it was submitted, but I'm sure we have the technology to get numbers. Okay, any board members comments. Yeah, I got a question that the application that you had for the telephone towel. Is that something that [32:29] Speaker C (unidentified): I so it was in a very large 146 page document that they had supplied after the initial application, so I did not print out the 11 by 17s on everything, but I did print out everything else for it, so the site plan did have to shift slightly because the original entrance did not meet site distance to the town. Do I have a copy [33:00] Chair: of what you have? I didn't see it. I don't know, I don't think so. You are you talking, yeah, well, you said that you just received the documents for the phone company tonight. [33:12] Speaker B (unidentified): That's why every day he had stopped buying which the condition of the use application. [33:18] Chair: That's what I didn't have. Okay, I'll look, but I don't think I have it. Maybe I know. Well, [33:23] Speaker C (unidentified): Well, when you stop by. [33:24] Chair: Yeah, no, not a problem. Nope, that was the... Perfectly for me, so thank you. [33:32] Speaker B (unidentified): Okay, so you have... [33:34] Chair: That's what he gave us tonight, so you should have it. He just handed it to us. Everybody has that. Okay. [33:40] Speaker E (unidentified): Hey, Nick, this gets back to my question of the other day of asking to have the attachments sent out when you send the agenda rather than me remembering to go to the website, site to click a link to go to something else to find an attachment. If you can just send it all in the email to us with all the attachments that we need, that would be super helpful. [34:01] Speaker C (unidentified): Yep, so what I'll do is I'll send them to the clerk and I'll send them to each of you at the same time so that we have the digital copy as well so you can browse that at your leisure before it [34:14] Speaker E (unidentified): gets posted. That's great. Thank you. Because I will also be away again on the 13th. So I'm going to be your virtual member forever. [34:28] Chair: Well, it's the magic of technology. So this actually [34:34] Speaker E (unidentified): is it's great that I can do this. [34:38] Tony: And I have to say, I will not be in the United States. I won't be in country on the 13th. I will be in Spain. Sorry, we're six hours ahead of time and it'll be nighttime then, middle of the night, so I will not be there on the 13th. What happened to the dedication? I'm going hiking. I'm going hiking. [35:07] Speaker E (unidentified): We're just going to have to simulcast the meeting in Spanish. [35:14] Chair: Okay, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting and set our next meeting for October 13th. So moved. Seconded. All in favor? Oh, thank you, Tony. All in favor? Aye. [35:32] Tony: All right.