Waterboro Planning Board Splits on Hooper Hill Road Subdivision Waivers

[0:39] Mark Solani: Everybody to the Town of Waterboro Planning Board meeting for October 7th, 2026. Angela, can we start with roll call please? Mark Solani. [0:47] Rick Madruga: Rick Madruga, yeah. Rebecca Higgins, here. Stacy Walker, yeah. Joe Prescott. [0:52] Mark Solani: All right, next on the agenda is public hearing over Hill Road one lot subdivision. Steve Everett is the representative, so [1:07] Steve Everett: you all made a review, yes, please, if you could up at the well, I guess. [1:11] Mark Solani: It doesn't matter, right, it's a microphone tonight, so [1:17] Steve Everett: this is a one lot subdivision, which I know you're familiar with, it's lot two of a survey that was done by BH2M in [Speaker D (unidentified): recently] 2023, I believe. Dan Savage, who is my client, he purchased lot two, and the reason that it's in subdivision is because another portion of that lot was sold, it was owned by one person, and then they sold, is that correct. They sold this one. See, this is lunch. Yeah. [2:14] Speaker E (unidentified): I'm not sure. I know I own this one. Yeah, this is the 1 we're trying to split. Yeah. [2:21] Steve Everett: However, it happened to qualify for subdivision, and then Dan is, he built a house which is unfinished, and he said I have enough acreage, I want to split it so I can finish my house, so I went out, located the wetlands, did one test pit, did some topographic work, located his house, his driveway, and that's kind of where we are. I [2:56] Mark Solani: see people in the audience. Did anybody have any questions? [3:01] Ben Brown: Yeah, I guess the question would be, like, what's the use of the land? Are you guys trying to find it? I'm sorry, Ben Brown. I'm going to butter to the lot. I believe there's a two acre plot. That's between, we have a total of five and a half acres there. We have, we bought our house with like three and a half acres, and then bought the two acre plot between our land, which might be, which is the one, yeah, basically just trying to sell it to finish the house. Oh, is it, yeah, and is it, so your house is in the front, my house would be on [3:42] Speaker E (unidentified): the left side, and then the land, the lot of turn to sell is on the right if you're looking from the [3:47] Ben Brown: road, yeah, between the two rock blocks, yeah, it's like the rock wall right where it's like [3:55] Speaker E (unidentified): right where it divides our property, it'll be that one over to the next rock wall, like just the wooded area right there, yeah, and then I live across the street. [4:05] Alex Herzog: At the lagoon land name? Alex Herzog. And was it me just to sell the land or what are you doing? Just trying to sell it? Yep. Exactly. To finish the house. There's just been a lot of talk in the neighborhood that someone said that you were trying to turn it to an Airbnb or something. No,, no. Just trying to sell it. Just trying to sell it. Yep. [4:44] Speaker H (unidentified): I'm not sure that answers the question of intention. Tension he wants to sell it but what can happen is it's subject to the same [4:53] Speaker D (unidentified): zoning restrictions whoever buys it whoever buys it right yeah correct yeah [5:02] Speaker H (unidentified): So yeah you're not gonna buy it from yourself and develop something so the property can be used under the same zoning laws that exists now whatever they want to do with it doesn't matter to me. So that's about as probably clear as you're going to get on intention for what will happen. Yeah. I have no idea what they're whoever. Sorry. I just wanted to clarify. [5:25] Alex Herzog: I know there's a, maybe you can add to that through the property. So there's like a spring from the other side of the road comes down and flows like a river straight through there. So. Kind of seems wetland. Oh, there's some wetlands out there. [5:44] Ben Brown: I'm just curious for you folks, maybe you know the answer. Is there a minimal building lot size in the town of Waterboro? I think it's 80,000 square foot for that zone. It's big enough. [5:58] Speaker I (unidentified): So the first lot would be 80,686 square feet, and the second lot would be 80,293 square feet of the site to us. And the minimum is 80,000 exactly [6:20] Mark Solani: I think something maybe that's important to the I think so the reasoning for it to be subdivision is just how quickly the lands would subdivide it up to this point yeah and if this was any other parcel of land we wouldn't even be here yeah so it's just timing so I think it's [6:40] Speaker D (unidentified): important to disclose that as well yeah it was like a couple of three years ago [6:45] Mark Solani: or something right so state law five years and town someone says that if you do certain things within a certain period of time it qualifies as a subdivision yeah so basically if [6:57] Speaker E (unidentified): I end up waiting like whatever it didn't work out this in this meeting then if I end up waiting what the three years or whatever then I could just do it anyway basically it would never come here and [7:08] Mark Solani: and you wouldn't have received it. Just happened. Five years, [7:13] Speaker I (unidentified): five years, five years. Well, [7:16] Speaker E (unidentified): it's been what to since 23. So yeah, it'd only be two [7:20] Mark Solani: years. Yeah. Right. From the first Yes. Okay. Yeah. [7:26] Speaker D (unidentified): Once I'm divided within a five year period. Right. [7:29] Speaker J (unidentified): This is owning us residential, right? Yes. Agricultural residential. [7:38] Speaker I (unidentified): Let's try and minimize planning board comments. Right now, we're focused on public comments. [7:45] Mark Solani: Any other questions from attendees at this point? Angela, you had received this. [7:53] Rick Madruga: I have emails from both you and Megan. Okay. Ben, I have an email from you. Are you all set? Okay, I do have one here. Randy doesn't appear to be here. Randy Legu, who lives up at the end. Hi, my name is Randall Legu, and I am an abatto to the proposed subdivision proposed by Daniel Savage of Five Legu Lane. Bar for me, I'm unable to attend the meeting on Wednesday, but want my opposition to be recognized for the reasons stated below. I'm opposed to the subdivision off a private road. It's my understanding that he wants to do an Airbnb for ATV rises. Since I put in Legu Lane three years ago, I've been the only person to maintain the road. I invested the tractor and box blade to maintain the road at my cost. Where Legu Lane meets Hooper Hill Road and Hooper Hill Road historic, historically only three residents have compute contributed, excuse me, to the maintenance of the section where this addition is being proposed. Adding a recreational dwelling would increase the traffic in road wear. Best regards, Randi Lee. Yes. Okay. I [9:19] Mark Solani: think if there's no other questions, we can take a motion to end the public hearing [9:27] Alex Herzog: portion of the agenda. [9:29] Speaker D (unidentified): I'd like a motion to end the public hearing. [9:36] Mark Solani: I'll listen. All right. So next we'll move on to Old Business, which is Hooper Hill Road. One lot subdivision, preliminary review. Steve Everett, representative. [9:48] Speaker I (unidentified): So now we're in time for more planning board discussion and questions for the applicant. So [10:00] Mark Solani: maybe, Kayla, a good place to start is to maybe summarize your memo. [10:05] Speaker I (unidentified): Sure. So it's obviously an approved use. The lots will both meet the minimum lot size as I stated earlier and be conforming lots. They exceed the minimum road frontage as well. They meet the subdivision ordinance and zoning ordinance requirements overall. And the main kind of points of my memo are about the waivers that have been requested. So, there have been waivers submitted for a drainage plan, soil erosion and sediment control plan, a hydrogeological analysis, and the inclusion of sprinklers. And then also a waiver for showing a second test pit location. So my recommendations for those are, I agree with the hydrogeological analysis being waived, given the scale of just one lot and it meeting the lot size requirements. Generally, we only ask large projects for that. If you want to waive the Drainage Plan and Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, I recommend the same recommendation as in a recent two-lot subdivision, which is just to place a condition on the plan limiting the lot that's undeveloped to 25% lot coverage. Coverage, just because more lot coverage generally means more impervious surface, and if we waive the drainage and erosion control plans, then that's a good, basically fail-safe to preventing any future issues. And most lots, the typical residential lot is far under 25% lot coverage, so it doesn't really restrict anything. I, in my memo, stated I would recommend not granting the second test pit location waiver. There wasn't what I found to be a legitimate reason provided. Inconvenience is not a reason. If the applicant can explain why a second test pit location doesn't need to be shown on the plan, that's fine but we have those requirements in place for a reason to ensure septic and everything is all set in the future so now [13:04] Speaker E (unidentified): What I have to do that or could I have the [13:07] Speaker I (unidentified): Buyer do the it's a perk test right basically oh we have to be on the plant in order for the subdivision plan to get approved is so you're asking for a waiver for that I'm just curious [13:19] Speaker D (unidentified): Why there were we would need to do two because we already did one right because that's the standard [13:25] Speaker I (unidentified): For all subdivisions is to have two so that way basically if your first septic system ever fails in the future there's a geological issue at that site you know there's one so you don't basically have a situation where you can't have home occupancy in a structure that's been built because there is no viable septic. Okay. Yeah. [13:49] Steve Everett: And when I was out there with Kenny Gardner, the one that did the test, and the reason that he selected that spot is there is a good spot to build a house. But also if you look farther to the southeast, there's a big knoll out there and he said that entire section would pass as far as a you know so he didn't think it was necessary to do another one but of course it's nice we walked out there it's all high and dry it's gravel so that you know it couldn't it shouldn't be an issue as far as he was concerned is that the person who did the first one [14:33] Speaker H (unidentified): Yeah, can he attest to that in a letter? I can let him know I can call [14:40] Steve Everett: him and say can you write me a letter based on what I'm sorry I don't know the [14:44] Speaker I (unidentified): process here but it's up to the board generally two are required for a reason yeah and I've never seen one waived before but [14:59] Steve Everett: would a letter be sufficient that's not up to me but a letter be sufficient could you also put in a [15:09] Mark Solani: condition that similar to your 25% or 20% could you put something in there that held a portion of that lot or maybe where he's talking about for that reason [15:26] Speaker I (unidentified): so that somebody didn't I'm not sure how that would work because we don't require the well location ahead of time and there has to be the 100 foot buffer between a septic and a well so that would just be a lot of like if then situations that i think i don't know how valuable [15:48] Mark Solani: such a condition or possible i guess so maybe my question what's what's the impact if he already located an area and said what is the what's the rub for him not to officially put it on the [16:00] Steve Everett: plan like is it cost is it well when we were out there he just he picked a spot that would be what he felt would be marginal it was close to another wetland he said if this one passes the rest of the whole lot as we look southeasterly all the way down there it's going to pass so we did the one test pit in the spot that he thought might be might fail and it passed so he says I mean and it all depends you know it's a fairly deep lot so whoever buys the lot and they're gonna they're gonna put their house where they want to put it right and I you know I there is a spot up close to where that test pit is by the wetland. But if I was going to buy it, I'd go back onto the knoll toward the rear. [17:02] Speaker D (unidentified): So if three years had passed, do you still [17:06] Speaker H (unidentified): have to do the two test pits to get a building permit? [17:09] Speaker I (unidentified): Is the septic permit required? [17:12] Rick Madruga: The septic permits come back with, I believe, to go grab one. [17:18] Speaker H (unidentified): So the two test pits is the standard irrespective of whether it's a subdivision or not. Yeah, I only did one bench notes for sure. [17:28] Speaker I (unidentified): That's my understanding. I mean, I don't deal with stuff that's just goes to building permit, but [17:35] Speaker H (unidentified): Just wondering if the hurdle doesn't exist in the future, because this is an unusual situation, we're trying to advance a rather normal activity. Yeah. The hurdle doesn't exist in the future, that it seems to me that letter or attesting to that might be adequate. If the hurdle exists for in all cases for everyone in the future, subdivision or otherwise, then I would not be in favor. That would be my opinion. [18:05] Mark Solani: So I guess this is where I'm lost. I'm maybe I'm being numb about it, but everything you just said in my mind supports it's easy enough to do the second testament. Yeah, so just do the second test, okay, you know what I mean, like that's what everything you're saying. [18:19] Speaker D (unidentified): Supports the fact that we should follow the standard if it's standard. Yeah, unless you want to wait two more years and then you don't have to do anything, right. Yeah. [18:27] Speaker E (unidentified): But it wouldn't be standard if I just waited, correct, that was my question. Yeah. [18:32] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, you waited two more years, you wouldn't have to. I think I think Angela. [18:39] Speaker I (unidentified): Just said their septic permits have to test the locations on them, so I think it. [18:43] Speaker D (unidentified): Is standard, so what, even if she waited it would still have to do it. Yeah, that's. [18:48] Speaker E (unidentified): I only did one on my house when I built it, which is right next door. Only one per test. [18:55] Speaker D (unidentified): I would think one would be sufficient, but if two's the rule, I don't know. I've never built a house. [19:05] Steve Everett: Well, typically a site evaluator, once somebody buys a lot, they decide where the house is going to go. Then they get a site evaluator to come out. He passes it, does the design, so that I don't believe there's two required for a. [19:19] Speaker I (unidentified): Single family. Since we're waiting on my information, the other waiver is the fire sprinkler waiver, which the fire marshal again recommends not granting, and I defer to that, sprinklers. [19:43] Mark Solani: Yeah. Yeah. My opinion hasn't changed on it. [19:48] Speaker H (unidentified): And so that falls into the same category as what I just asked, which is in the future. [19:53] Mark Solani: And now when we discuss what the last one where it wasn't, it wasn't, if you'd wait. All right. So the, we've got the hydro geological one, which you recommend. So I think we're good with that one. Correct. Everybody agree that we can wave that one. So, next we'll do with the drainage. Plan soil erosion to kill has made a recommendation. I think we were all in agreement with the last scenario that was. Acceptable, which was to. put in as a condition that 25% of the lot coverage. Average limitation can't exceed 25. Is everybody okay with that? Yep. Recommendation again. Okay. So, next leads us to we'll do with the sprinklers since we've dealt with that 1 before sprinklers. What's everybody's thoughts on the I think it should be optional granting the waiver. Yeah, we did and we're not here, so my opinion hasn't changed about it, so I think that one we're comfortable with. Yeah, okay, well we'll vote on it, but I don't think we need to have more discussions how much to write it, so that just leaves us with the pit, so we'll [21:27] Speaker I (unidentified): See what you just said they had one on these three that I just picked off my [21:33] Steve Everett: Desk. Yeah, and any client that comes and buys a buys the law do it anyway, right? They're gonna end up having to do it anyway for a design. Yeah, which would [21:43] Speaker I (unidentified): Be a second test. I will say every subdivision plan I've been a part of the approval process for years had to test about locations which are saying it's not necessary, it's not mandatory, it's a mandatory standard in our ordinance. You're deciding whether you want to waive that standard for this application or not. Oh, I thought you just [22:09] Rick Madruga: Said there was one no for the building for the building permit here those three [22:14] Speaker I (unidentified): That the standard in the ordinance says two for something first subdivision, so those are first [22:22] Mark Solani: Ones subdivisions. I guess I 'm still not understanding why not. I'm a little confused. I don't have a compelling argument to say why not, that's why I mean if I knew [22:34] Speaker E (unidentified): There was two required I would have just had the guy do another one and he should [22:45] Steve Everett: Have known if he talked about it and you know Ken just said well he said this is the worst spot that's not in a wetland, and the whole rest of the lot will pass. [23:03] Mark Solani: Right. This is the one I get because it adds expense to the person that's buying it. That one, I can understand. This one, I'm just not getting the other side of the argument for me to grant this waiver. I don't know what everybody else thinks. [23:18] Speaker E (unidentified): I mean, I think it still adds expense. [23:21] Mark Solani: Well, that's what I'm trying to understand. You know what I mean? When we had the discussion with the other waivers Whereas previously, there was a compelling argument about the added expense that would add to the builder of the house that wouldn't have been there had they waited the extra time. So that's the part I'm trying to understand right now. [23:40] Steve Everett: Yeah, and I think the reason they have two test pits on subdivisions is because nobody really knows. They want to make sure that the soils are decent on the property throughout. Out that there's at least two test pits on each lot, so there's people so they [24:01] Speaker D (unidentified): have to be a certain distance apart from each other. Yes, 50 feet, I think. Yeah, I don't know either. He says it's standards to it should be too, but there's always marables to every situation, it seems like. Kind of like, you know, don't really see the big deal to do a second one, like you said, sprinklers. Yeah, that should be optional, in my opinion. But so Angela, just because this was just because it's a subdivision is always why. Yes, I do too. This was just somebody buying in one lot, building a house, they like to do one unless they have run into a problem as far as to make the town happy. They only have to do one [24:57] Rick Madruga: to get the building. It's the site evaluator. Yeah. But if they go to a lot, say they went both ends and the first test pit failed, they're going to go to another one to see. And it would show both test pits on the plan. [25:18] Steve Everett: Well, maybe three if it was a really bad lot looking for a spot. [25:25] Speaker H (unidentified): So doing a second test pit marginally increases the value when he goes to sell it, but he has to then pay for the test pit, so it's probably a wash. [25:34] Speaker D (unidentified): I don't know if it's going to increase the value at all. [25:38] Speaker K (unidentified): He just knows he has to build up a lot. [25:40] Speaker H (unidentified): You did an evaluation with two test pits. I don't know if that increases value or not. No idea. So on the scale of this is $100 on this side and this is a million, what's a test pit evaluation for? [26:03] Steve Everett: I mean, it's quite low. Oh, it's more of a time thing than a cost thing, I think. [26:08] Speaker E (unidentified): Would you agree, Dan? Yeah, because wouldn't it push another, it would make it a smaller meeting? Well, it could. [26:15] Steve Everett: I mean, they could conditionally approve it based on another test pit that was done at the same time. [26:21] Speaker E (unidentified): So if I went to sell it, basically they'd have to perk test it again? [Steve Everett: Well, I guess.] Which they're gonna do anyway, right? Yeah, I just don't understand why they're- [26:33] Steve Everett: Unless they build up where he put this test pit. I mean, they're not going to put in a leach field up at this test pit location if they propose to build the building way down on that knoll. Yeah. I mean, obviously, he's going to do another design, and in that design, they do another test pit automatically. [26:55] Speaker D (unidentified): You said that knoll is an ideal spot for a house. [27:00] Steve Everett: That's where I would put it. [27:01] Speaker D (unidentified): Is that far away from the road where it's going to add a lot more expense? It's farther away from the road, so that creates a big expense for somebody to put a driveway or a road or whatever. Some people might say, I want to be close because I don't want to spend 50 grand. Well, the test pit's cool. I'm just trying to think, you know, the test, somebody would want to put the house up in the closer to the wetland because of the expense of putting the house further back. They do, they also might not have the budget to do that. I'm just [27:34] Speaker E (unidentified): trying to think outside the box of it 's but this test pit is a lot closer to the road than his ideal location for the house so either way I feel like it [27:47] Steve Everett: would be adequate, and regardless of where he decides to put the house, another test but it's gonna have to be done for a design, so this decision is [28:03] Speaker I (unidentified): about what the planning board is comfortable with. When you're evaluating what is has to be considered a subdivision application, what do you feel comfortable waving and not waving? We [28:21] Mark Solani: want to vote. Let's go through. All right, so first, can I get, do the hydrogeological analysis, can I get a motion to grant that waiver? [28:37] Speaker K (unidentified): I make a motion to grant the waiver for the hydrogeological analysis. I'll do a second. I'll second. All those in favor? [28:48] Mark Solani: Can I get a motion to approve the waiver of the drainage plan and the soil erosion and sediment control plan with the condition added of the 25% lot coverage proposal? Remember [29:13] Speaker D (unidentified): all that, right? I'll make a motion to grant the waiver for the drainage, the drainage plan, hopefully I'm reading this right. Drainage plan, soil erosion, and sediment control plan. Based on the condition of 25% block coverage. Perla. All right, maximum coverage, maximum coverage is 25% in favor. [29:59] Mark Solani: Can I get a motion to grant the waiver for the sprinkler system? [30:06] Speaker I (unidentified): 2nd, that motion to all those in favor you have to make a motion. I'll make a motion to waive the grant for the [30:18] Speaker D (unidentified): the mandatory sprinkler system. [30:21] Mark Solani: All right, test pit. I get a motion to approve the waiver for the test pit. [30:40] Speaker D (unidentified): I'll make a motion to approve the waiver for the second test pit. I [30:48] Speaker H (unidentified): second the motion. [30:50] Mark Solani: All those in favor? [30:56] Speaker I (unidentified): So that fails. Will you ask the rest of the question, actually? [31:01] Mark Solani: Sorry, but will you ask, so all in favor of not granting the waiver or today although it's not in favor of all those not leaving the requirement for the second test pit, we just need a vote, right, since we met me, so yeah, [Speaker D (unidentified): so because] Because of that, we can't vote on the plan, correct? Because correct. [31:46] Speaker I (unidentified): Yeah, so because that waiver is not going forward, we need that information. Preliminary plan. So we'll come back with that information. It's also a good chance to fix some of the typos and little things I had identified in my memo and just get those ready. And that memo I sent of on September 14. So if you're looking for it, you should have in your email for that date. [32:29] Speaker E (unidentified): Basically, we just have to have another meeting. [32:32] Speaker I (unidentified): You would have to have you are going to have to have at least one more because this is subdivision. So we do find a preliminary plan and then you have to do final plan approval. Now you'll probably need two more so we need to approve the preliminary plan and [32:50] Steve Everett: then the final so two more meetings so you just need to add the test bit and [32:55] Speaker I (unidentified): then and fix that fix the typos that I put on my memo dated September 19th 14th [33:03] Speaker E (unidentified): That I have to pay for it again. Yep. Okay. I'll [33:11] Steve Everett: call Ken and get him down here so he's [33:15] Speaker D (unidentified): he's not Scotland again. Is this information on the town website? Which information? The proposed plan. There's that available. I guess yes. Yeah, it is. It's under the [33:37] Mark Solani: Okay, that takes care of business. Correct. All right. So, next is a new business, which is. [33:48] Speaker E (unidentified): Yeah, thank you. Everybody. Thank you. Thanks to y'all. Have a nice night now. [33:55] Mark Solani: So, new business, hold out for growth. [34:03] Tully: It's Tully. The last name is Tully, not Tulson, but that's fine. Oh, that's my error. Typo. How are you all? Thank you for letting me come up. Yeah, so I purchased, am I good to start? Yeah. I purchased the 4.6 acres from Bill Earl behind the Vandy's in July of this year. And I've been working out there, basically moving material to build the driveway to access the land. Because right now I access through Bill's property to the right of the old Vandy's. So that's what, if you see what's going on, I'm taking all the piles, all the dirt, bringing it up to the road. I would like to get approval to put in to start with the 100 by 60 garage for Bay garage also on the plan you'll see a second one the idea for me right now is to do one building I will occupy half of the first building I have family who live on East Shore Road on the lake and we have you know needed some room for storage, boats, trailers, stuff like that. Get them off the property, get them off the lake. Now being on the lake, I've been coming up here 25 years. I have met a lot of people in the lake, surrounding properties in the lake, that are all saying, hey, we could use some stuff. We could use some storage, I mean, for parking our boats instead of driving them to Shapley, Maine, or us, we go to Long Lake Marina. So ideally, half the building I would have personally to have my own storage. I also have a generator business out of Seabrook, New Hampshire. Again meeting lots of people here in the lake. I've been doing more and more generator installations in this area. I just did one in Limerick. So I would also like to store some of my generators at this facility and some stock electrical stock. You know most of its electrical or electrician and be able to have a little side not side but second hub to work out of when i have work up this way in may rather than coming up from seabrook where i'm out of so two of the bays i just figured if i'm going to build this i'm going to build it large and then if anyone who i know wants to rent a bay it'll be available to help offset the cost of the construction the pay of the land taxes upkeep all that and then if that doesn't work out I had thought few units for contractor rental contractor base in Seabrook I built a building it's a five unit and I have it fully rented I occupy half of it down there so it's worked out well for me you know a lot of residents here who have businesses of their own working out of their homes and maybe this would be an opportunity for them to get all their work stuff trucks junk whatever ladder is out of their yards open up the garages have some space to run a business out of so that would be my last resort idea with this with these other two units if that was to work well keep clean then we would like to construct the second building and rent have that all available for rental as well so that's my that's my plan now i if i am approved or allowed just want you to know that i will not rent to any excavation companies or any car mechanics or truck mechanics any landscaper companies with many trucks and trailers and pieces of equipment because i do not like junk everywhere basically it'll be Kept clean and neat and just more or less contracts electricians, plumbers, paint is, HVAC people that may have a van or two that will have a place to meet in the morning, grab their belongings, their stuff, to go off to their jobs wherever they are working, and then come back and drop off their vans and go home for the day. So that's my whole idea. [38:18] Speaker D (unidentified): So this is going in the area that's being cleared now back behind the Vandies? Yeah. Yep. So be [38:24] Tully: visible from the road. Excuse me, it will be visible from the road. It's visible from the left side coming in from Old Elford Road towards the center of East Waterboro, North Waterboro. And yeah, you'll see it, I think, coming in. [38:42] Speaker D (unidentified): 60 by 100, is that what you said? Correct. Yeah. [38:46] Speaker K (unidentified): So when you say you're going to occupy half the first garage, you're not going to have a residence there? Oh, no. Or apartment, okay. No. Just to store your stuff. Okay. [38:56] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah. So any septic or anything? Yep. I've had a plan done. [39:01] Tully: We have well location on the site plan. I'd have the septic design. So each unit I have proposed a bathroom in, so there are four bathrooms per building, and I had Ken Gardner do the design. So we will be in, we will planning to install one main leach field which will cover both buildings. There'll be two separate septic tank, one septic tank per building, both tied into the one main leach field in between the two buildings. We will have a shared well. I plan on doing a dug well. I did have a before the land was purchased, I had a ground samples test on water samples test done for any contaminants because I know about the gas station above it that I didn't know and I don't want to buy a piece of land that has contaminated. So I had a company come up from Dover, New Hampshire, and did a extensive ground water. We dug down, we got water samples, we got soil samples. Everybody came back [39:59] Speaker H (unidentified): clean, which is great. But behind where Vandy's is, there used to be a ton of junk cars there is. Yeah. [40:04] Tully: I've cleaned a lot of it out. I've cleaned a lot of it out. Yeah. So that was, I knew before I purchased, I mean, I saw it get cleared a few, you know, five years ago, and I said we gotta have that tested, you know, before you own it, because if you own it and it has contaminants, I know the expenses that could be involved. But no, it's clean. Has anyone seen the proposed blueprint for the building? I mean, so it's really just more of a residential style looking garage, wood frame, metal roof. I do want to do metal siding 12 by 12 overhead doors so you can get some boats in four of them and then there is a i don't know if you have the actual site plan outside storage for boats i wasn't planning on that right now no again i don't want to become a marina where i have to worry about people winterizing and stuff like this is just for close friends i mean just storage i mean yeah so it wouldn't be for me it wouldn't be for public it would be just for hey this guy and this guy i know you know yeah we could put him in there and pay so much for the season and you know we'll [41:29] Speaker D (unidentified): have him inside and a lot of the weather and what's the total height of it 26 yeah 26 [41:37] Speaker I (unidentified): 26 feet limits 35 feet so he's well under that yep it is pretty low down there though [41:46] Tully: few so i don't think it'd be too constructive but i do plan on doing some plantings you know off the road because there's a new home being built there to the left i've talked to those folks and just told them my idea and that they weren't happy it wasn't going to be a multi-house subdivision and so we had talked about putting up a fence so they don't have to stare at it now if we go in there at night with the headlights blowing it we don't i don't want to you know interrupting them but they told me they don't that they would prefer not to have a fence that they said so i said a tree line that we do a tree line a natural fence so that's definitely going to be done because i don't want to go in there at nine o'clock at night to go work on something of my own you know a four or whatever you know and then have my headlights going in their windows you know which the house is far off but still gonna put some [42:40] Speaker I (unidentified): a natural barrier up are you planning to remove the fence from the site plan then no because [42:47] Mark Solani: if it's required i'll put it up that was one of your you know your recommendations right was [42:54] Speaker M (unidentified): the fact that it showed the fence there but i preferred the fence myself but the cost of that fence will cost me roughly forty thousand dollars and this is the fence that the neighbors said they [43:05] Speaker I (unidentified): don't want they don't even want yeah so it's so yeah basically the standard is to kind of protect neighbors butters right and to have some screening but it doesn't say you have to have a fence so the fence was the suggestion from the public works in code when right we met with you but i think they prefer vegetation you know that's so he would just swap out on the plan [43:32] Mark Solani: and the fence for showing where the vegetation would go. [43:36] Tully: Trees, pine trees, pines. I don't want to do hip hop or vities or anything. Take, keep it natural as bad as it must be. Maybe some headlock or something. [43:48] Speaker K (unidentified): So if you rent it out to HVAC electricians, it's just a place for them to store, not to do business. [43:57] Tully: No, it wouldn't be like a showroom or anything. There's no place for a showroom to be. Again I'm going to be coming and going with customers. No, so I'm an electrician. I have again my unit at Seabrook. That's just where we warehouse our materials and our work trucks, and then the employees come in their vehicles in the morning, park, go into the shop, get their daily routine tasks, get their stock off the shelves, stock their vans, and go to the job. So it wouldn't be again mechanics or excavation companies where they're fixing big machines, tearing the place up, junk everywhere. No boat and mechanics, no storage or shop I call it for contractors. If that was even needed, I'm not too sure how in demand that is here in Waterborough, but it may be a good thing. I mean, mostly I have a lot of friends on the lake that are like, we'll, we'll rent space, so that's why we said we'll do one building and we'll see if it, if it works, and then you know go from there. That's how I left off with Jason and the building department, saying, you know, and I think we had mentioned that if we get approved to be for the one building, if we were to do the second building, we'd have to come back [45:15] Speaker M (unidentified): and see you to review that. Is that correct? No, so because you have both buildings on the plan [45:24] Tully: So yeah, I wanted to have everything. This is my plan, you know. I don't want to do one thing and then come back a year later. So now I want to do this. So this is, this would be my plan. [45:35] Speaker K (unidentified): So is the limited parking specific to the front of each of the garages? [45:41] Rick Madruga: Or is there more parking? There'll be more parking. [45:45] Speaker K (unidentified): I'm just looking at the side. I know you're going to be really close to the fire bar, but can the fire truck get down there and turn around? [45:51] Speaker I (unidentified): Oh, yes. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Mike reviewed and he was okay. Because I was like, trying to figure out where I'll park in the groups. Yeah, it's a good amount of area. Kayla, what's the technical proposed use? What's the name? Is it storage? Or is it I was considering it under the parking requirement for warehousing because I think that's the most similar use in that table. And they will exceed the parking requirements. Something like they need, I think, like six or seven spaces for that use, and they have 19, I think. You had drawn out, no, besides just the base themselves, would there be any vehicle [46:33] Tully: storage, vehicle storage? I haven't planned on that, but let's say someone wanted to rent a bay and store vehicles, a truck and their boat. Yeah, 60 feet deep, I mean, maybe [46:49] Speaker H (unidentified): someone would put 15 cars. I got a Jeep, I need to do things like that. So my question about the definition was, is there a constraint? What are the constraints on that technical definition of warehouse? Is it chemicals? Is it, well, that's what I'm getting at, right, if there's a car there [47:08] Mark Solani: like, yes, all of a sudden you get a full tank of gas that's sitting in there. That's what I was wondering. What does that change anything of what we're [47:15] Speaker H (unidentified): talking about, landscapers putting chemicals, and there are, I think, things like I was saying, no landscapers, but for the meeting I was thinking, yeah, what [47:26] Speaker I (unidentified): kind of stuff's going in here? So with the 545 Main Street, for example, we had them do the spill control plan, but that was because they're part of the well head protection district, so that's a requirement when you're in wellhead, but it's not a requirement if you're outside that district to have a any sort of spill plan for warehousing. [47:49] Speaker D (unidentified): So there's, there's not really any additional, other than fire rule, fire regulations and [47:56] Rick Madruga: stuff like that. In hindsight, thinking about it now, if something were to go in with a lithium battery, they probably want to let the fire department know that there are lithium batteries [48:05] Speaker I (unidentified): reason there, but yeah, this is a good point, but yeah, in terms of zoning, I don't, yeah, it's a slab [48:11] Speaker H (unidentified): floor must be, I'm gonna have frost walls and then a slab on grade. Yeah, so that'll also limit the, I was thinking about large yellow pieces of equipment and how heavy they are as well. Yeah, [48:22] Tully: no, there'll be none of that. I know one of my tenants in Seabrook has a truck and a company, and then I'll never lease out to get to them. [48:35] Speaker I (unidentified): So my recommendations for bringing back a final site plan would be to show the vegetated screening on the site plan and take away the fence. Include your proposed fire safety measures because you have a lot that you've already talked with the fire marshal on, but just have those in your documentation. You can either put a note on top of your elevation drawings or write them up and attach them as a Word document. It doesn't really matter to me, but attaching those is good. And then just the recommend that the board schedule a public hearing so that would be the next step, and you would be responsible for the Butters noticing, which I kind of let you know before. So you'd work with Angela to get those, the official list, and then they just need to be sent out within seven days prior to the public hearing. [49:38] Speaker J (unidentified): One question. Are you allowed to put a well in a setback to an adjacent property? Because I'm just looking at this like right on. [49:52] Speaker I (unidentified): It just has to be 100 feet from any septic and [50:01] Speaker J (unidentified): you're having power obviously and there's [50:04] Tully: no power right now is that what you asked I'm sorry oh there will be power yes yeah [50:10] Speaker J (unidentified): I see the power pole but yeah that's where I just wonder what you're doing for like power in the building and heat just curious you're gonna have lighting and outdoor lighting [50:21] Tully: Mining yeah there will be a fire alarm system you know commercial fire and yes [50:28] Speaker D (unidentified): propane furnace for heating it's the only home furnace loading we don't need [50:38] Speaker J (unidentified): to locate propane tanks or anything like that right okay [50:46] Speaker H (unidentified): This is fun can you put up a song giant neon sign come put your stuff here yeah go under the sign organ [50:59] Speaker I (unidentified): so he basically just has to make sure it's small enough that he doesn't need a [51:03] Tully: permit for it okay I don't plan on putting any again more private I'm just [51:09] Speaker H (unidentified): I'm the newest one here, so I don't know all the answers. I don't even know some of them. [51:18] Tully: The whole contractor rental thing idea, that's my last resort. If friends and families don't want to, you know, if I have the place open for a year and I'm paying taxes on it, okay, you know what, maybe I can get some income to help out here by getting the local contractor work out of here. but again if it gets filled up with personal friendly stuff yeah that's what will happen and if everybody says you know what I don't want to start you anymore Nick and I have two bays open then I can say okay and you know reach out the folks in here and say hey if you're looking for a place to run your shop out of or something that I have a spot to come take a look that 's I would like to be able to have that opportunity it's not my main goal good [52:06] Speaker I (unidentified): the scheduled public hearing yeah what [52:12] Rick Madruga: do you need for turnaround time to make your changes [52:15] Tully: On your plan, Steve is going to change the offense to shrubbery. Can I get a half hour? Half hour? Yes, Steve did on the site plan for me, just so you all know. I mean, we can probably get you [52:32] Mark Solani: we have get it from the next, so we already know we have one, so as long as [52:45] Speaker M (unidentified): everybody else is here, so notify a butters seven days prior to that date, no [52:57] Speaker I (unidentified): No, and you need to do certified mail. Okay. [53:01] Speaker K (unidentified): But Angela, can I give you enough time the 21st then? Yeah. Okay. [53:08] Rick Madruga: Okay, I'm hearing. Is that for the 21st? Awesome. [53:13] Speaker I (unidentified): That's that's all we need. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. [53:20] Mark Solani: Next on the agenda, review of the minutes from previous meetings. So, 1st listed is July 15th, 2026. I did have an edit. 15th, excuse me. I had 1 edit down under the paragraph that starts Victor, right? I think we should edit it says we are leasing we do have a client and they're willing to have it in the lease it's going to be in the lease I think we should just say it's going to be in the lease it's very good note-taking Angela how about we go through them all and then okay so next was August 5th there was no meeting, so we don't have anything there. [54:25] Speaker I (unidentified): Next is August 19th. [54:26] Mark Solani: I had an edit that one as well. [54:32] Speaker I (unidentified): On the last page, [54:39] Mark Solani: where we did the election of officers, you noted that I abstained from approving myself as a chair, but you didn't note that Stacey abstained. [54:51] Rick Madruga: Because she didn't. She voted for herself. [54:53] Speaker I (unidentified): Oh. You can't vote for yourself? [54:55] Speaker D (unidentified): I didn't know you were going to vote for yourself. [54:56] Mark Solani: I thought you had to abstain when you're, she voted for herself for yourself too, I thought that, I guess it's accurate. Okay, that was my only suggested at it, which is not. September's, did anybody have any changes? September 2nd, I didn't have any edits for those minutes, and then September 16th, there was no meeting. So this is to review. So if I could get a motion to approve the minutes of July 15th, 2026, as chain as edited, August 5th, 2026, August 19th, 2026, September 2nd, 2026, and September 16th, 2026. [55:54] Speaker D (unidentified): Which one? July 15. I'll make a motion to accept the minutes from July 15. As with the edits. Also, August 5, now, August 5, August 19. September 2, and September 16,. There was no meaning, so that's fine, yeah, I'll [56:24] Mark Solani: second that. Well, there's a favorite. All right, next on the [56:30] Speaker I (unidentified): Agenda is communication. Yes, so two different training opportunities. I you've probably seen them via email, but just wanted to kind of note them. One is just a webinar that was yesterday day. And then one is a in person planning board training workshop in Augusta. On the 27th. Sometimes they do the same workshops virtually. And when the next one happens, I would really encourage everyone to try to participate especially if you haven't participated [57:19] Speaker K (unidentified): in one before they usually do a couple in person a year or yeah they usually do [57:24] Speaker I (unidentified): a couple in person a year and then one or two remote ones a year make the in-person remote yeah I think you did their main municipal association they put them on. So it's trainings for how to be as a planning board, essentially. Oh, I just did it. Yeah,. Not [57:44] Mark Solani: too long ago. I did something didn't that didn't the law go into effect in January? Yes, that's why it was because, yes. And they had to take my name because I, well, because it was through, it was through zoom. And so I couldn't connect my town email to the Zoom invite, because I was doing it on my device that was hooked to my work. It just worked out so that my personal email address wound up on that, but it didn't mask my registration. But that's how they were going to note that I met the requirement for the state law was that. Yeah. [58:23] Speaker H (unidentified): Yeah. So I went or attended by Zoom the last one in Hollis, which was quite good, particularly for me yeah but they don't give you any kind of certificate of participation or anything oh yeah I shared something with you guys [58:37] Speaker I (unidentified): afterwards yeah so the one you attended is there like official training they've been doing for years the law doesn't actually the law that was passed with 1829 and whatever the other one is that doesn't actually reference that particular workshop it just says land use training and it's very broad so what attorneys throughout the state and MMA are saying is you can interpret that very broadly so like some of the stuff I've done with you guys where we're training about land use and that could qualify. But anytime you do a training if you let Angela Rye know we can keep a record of it you can send like your confirmation email or something however like that's just good for us to have. and it's also just kind of helpful because if I know like what kind of trainings you guys are going to it also helps me know like okay what other things maybe it should I bring so I'll just keep sharing those all right next [59:49] Mark Solani: Miscellaneous, just a reminder, the Planning Board has one open seat. Anyone is interested in serving on the board. That leaves us with adjournment. So I could get a motion to adjourn to go into workshop to discuss zoning ordinance amendments, make [1:00:09] Speaker D (unidentified): a motion to adjourn and go into workshop. To discuss some, I will second that.