Eliot Planning Board Advances Starboard Cove Pier Permit to Public Hearing

[1:03] Chair: Recording in progress. [Jay Obie: Karina.] Are you able to hear us? Hello, Karina, can you hear us? Do you have a second one on there with Eric? Hi, I'm [2:14] Speaker D (unidentified): here. I'm having [2:16] Speaker E (unidentified): trouble hearing you guys, though. All right, are you able to hear us? Okay. [2:20] Speaker D (unidentified): Okay, Karina, the volume level is really low. Is there a way to boost it on your end? [2:26] Chair: All right, so the mics are on. We can hear them working here. Right. How about now? There you go. [2:35] Speaker D (unidentified): I can hear you, but I'm having to turn up my PC audio to, like, a really high level to hear you. Okay. [2:42] Chair: So, why don't we kick off the meeting, and we'll have a little brief conversation as a test okay so you're all set recording on town hall streams okay so this is october 6 20 26 6 0 5 p.m it's the meeting of the elliott planning board this evening we have two members present in person and we have one member available remote on zoom so we've satisfied the quorum requirements as we do every time we meet may we please stand and have a pledge of allegiance we typically have a 10-minute input session so i'd like to use some of this time to talk about this new system just to get some comments back from anybody that's remote for the people in the room there is a microphone that has a number on it 's a numeric number that coincides with the number that's on the table so in other words I am on mic for I have mic for on the table the reason we do this is because there is a new camera system that is totally replacing the owl that we used to be the tabletop system those cameras are pre-programmed, and when you speak into a microphone, I'll use an analogy, it opens the gate to let the system know that there's somebody speaking at this position, for number four, that triggers the cameras to switch because they are pre-programmed to look at mic position number four. So that's why you cannot change any of the microphones around. They all have to go at the position for which they're programmed. There is the button on the top, which is the push button, will toggle between mute and active, being green, mute being red, and at the end of the evening we can pick up the microphones and turn them over, and there's a master on-off switch on the bottom, and we have a docking system that's on a table next to us, which uses a USB connector for charging, and the microphones have a very specific way in which they need to go in and come out of there. And so I think for the first few sessions I'll take all the microphones and make sure they get seated properly, because we don't want to break anything. Because it's, it's a, it's a delicate, it's the same connector like you have on the mouse, so it's, it's a delicate connector, and if you grab it wrong, you could tweak it. Well, we want to make sure it's it's fully charged for the next meeting, right? And what will happen is those microphones are not left out. Kim will come in and she'll put them away and make sure the charge is on, because the microphones are fairly expensive. They don't want any of the groups that come into the room to, you know, be curious and pick them up or so they leave the room. Okay, so that's the new system in terms of in-room cameras, of which there are two hanging down there. There is another one here that is the audience-facing. So when the gentleman is at the podium, that camera comes live, and that's what broadcasts out on the Zoom. So there was also a host computer that Don has at the town planner position, and that's where, if we get into any situations where we want to look at ordinance or look at the town website, she'll pull it up on her computer and put it into the system. If we bring in a USB stick, same thing, that goes to Dawn, and it's her computer that actually will be used as the host computer. So that said, Karina, do you have an opinion on the audio that you're receiving so far? [7:34] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, so some feedback is that when I do turn up my computer audio way, up, you are very clear. Like I can definitely hear you well through the microphone, and it's like the audio isn't garbled at all. But I will say that I don't pick up any audio from ambient. In, so like when you guys stood up away from the, microphones to do the pledge of allegiance, didn't hear any of that at all. It was just completely quiet, right? Okay, so if there's like a question from the audience and they don't speak into a microphone, you'll need to repeat that [8:11] Speaker E (unidentified): back, because it'll just not get picked up at all. Yep, so the microphones, they're all, it's all a [8:17] Chair: direct address microphone, so you're correct. If you get off the microphone, there is no room ambient microphone to pick up anything that's going on in the room. So and [8:33] Speaker D (unidentified): if there was a way to boost just the level of the microphones to Zoom through the host computer, maybe that would be nice, just because I have like my volume set up to like 80 and I never need to do it that high. [8:47] Chair: Okay, so what we'll do is we'll talk to the programmer to put the system together, and we don't need more level in the room itself. We need more level going out to Zoom. [9:00] Speaker D (unidentified): And we can set that up. Yeah, and I do like the cameras. I think the camera system seems to be working well. It's nice that it automatically goes to the person who's speaking, and it's better than [9:11] Chair: the owl. Okay, well, we're going to have a somebody at the podium a little bit later, so do pay attention to what's coming up, because this will be our first podium address test. Okay, how exciting. All right, so that's there's nobody else online, I believe, other than Karina, so there is no other public input, so we concludes that section. No new business, but let's go back to old business, and the old business is 44 Starboard Cove Road, Map 70, Lot 27, PB 2607. It's replacement in kind of a 4 by 50 foot pier leading to a 3 by 30 gangway landing on a 6 by 20 float, which are located by two helical moorings, and it's also to repair an existing 12 by 80 foot riprap that's existing, and it's as I say, it's a repair. This is a shoreland zoning permit application, so I typically first ask the planner if there are any updates and comments you'd like us to hear from you on [Speaker F (unidentified): Fair enough.] Sir, would you please approach the little microphone and that is that just seems totally inadequate. It does, there you go. Yes, it does. I suppose if one was seated, that would be okay, but one is not. [11:23] Jay Obie: Perhaps maybe I'm a little too tall as well. Okay. That could be the issue. [Chair: Good evening, sir.] Well, so good evening, everybody. My name is Jay Obie. I'm the lead environmental scientist at TF Moran, an engineering firm in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. [11:49] Chair: Okay. Okay, so she can't hear from the podium. So I have a suggestion just for this evening, because, again, the microphone number is tied to that location. Could you pick it up like it's a handheld microphone? Make sure it isn't stuck. There you go. [12:12] Jay Obie: How about now, testing? One, two, three. [12:15] Chair: I bet you that's great. That's so much better. Okay, so it's a, and Dawn was not, her mic was not turned on. So can you hear me, Karina? [12:27] Speaker D (unidentified): Yes, I hear you now, thank you. Sorry about that. [12:30] Chair: Okay. Well, thank you for sorting this with us. [12:33] Jay Obie: No, that's okay, no problem. It's, excuse me, it's good to be part of the first test drive here. Okay, so. [12:44] Chair: That was a little bit of feedback I was hearing coming out of yours. [12:49] Jay Obie: Okay. So again, for the record, my name is Jay Obie. And I'm with the engineering firm located in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. Returning for you tonight to add some points of clarification. There were a number of points that you needed additional information on. I don't know if there's a new message up there for you folks to see or not. [13:24] Speaker F (unidentified): She's saying she can't. [13:25] Chair: It seems like that camera is not on. Not kicking in like it should. That camera which is supposed to pick up any podium speaker is not working. [13:36] Speaker G (unidentified): It's not picking up, yeah. Okay. There it goes. [13:39] Chair: I don't know what happened. Okay. Can you see him now, Karina, because we can see when he speaks, I can see the camera switch over to him. [13:51] Speaker D (unidentified): I guess we'll have to see when he speaks. Okay. [13:57] Jay Obie: I'm not seeing a change in [13:59] Chair: the camera but up on that monitor there's a picture in picture and if you notice a small [14:05] Jay Obie: small picture okay great is you being broadcast okay fantastic all right so we have a number of points that we wanted to clarify with you folks and thank you for your patience with us and being flexible and allowing us to join in this next session first and foremost we wanted to demonstrate to you that this was a replace in kind and we I think with the initial submission that was prepared by Riverside and Pickering it accidentally omitted the existing conditions plan so hopefully you have that in front of you this evening so that you can see the plan before you prepared by a licensed land surveyor does show that there was an existing metal pier there in place. I think an interesting point that I picked up on is that the application does say in-kind. However, when you look at the existing conditions plan, the existing metal pier is not 50 feet in length. It's more like 44 or so. And when I went back in time and looked at what happened, we believe that an application was submitted to the town at one point that had a different project description that more accurately described the project as replacing the existing 44 by four foot pier with the new very slightly larger pier but some something happened where the town requested the applicant Riverside and Pickering to send in a new cover application page and when Kirsten who was here before submitted that she wrote on there In kind, I think she may be in haste. Wasn't clear as perhaps the initial form was, so that's where that there is a bit of a discrepancy there, but not nonetheless, it's it still meets local standards and in state standards, but it is an expansion. It would be a subtle, it would be a subtle expansion of the pier. Yes, okay. Next up for clarification is we added detail relative to the proposed erosion and sediment control devices. They proposed a turbidity curtain will be used, and that's depicted on page or sheet rather C01. That is what is marked by an X. [17:26] Chair: The amber color, I believe. [17:27] Jay Obie: I believe. It's marked by. [17:34] Chair: It's the dash with an X and then a long dash with an X? [17:38] Jay Obie: Yes, that sounds correct. Okay. There's also a details page, I believe, on the doc details page, likely CO3 and or CO4. There's more detail regarding the location of the proposed tribidity curtain. [18:18] Chair: Okay, you've answered my question, because my only question up front from last meeting was what's the why the discrepancy on the two dimensions, and that also went back to the application, because the application had one number on the plan set at a different number, but there's also a third number which was the existing peer number. So just going to ask the planner, I'm going to ask the planner a question. So now we have three sets of numbers, right? There was there is the as built currently, there is the application had a number, and then there is the proposed number, so that's three different numbers. I just want to make sure we don't lose sight of what is exactly there now and what is asked for. [19:17] Jay Obie: I think it would be correct to say two sets of two sets of numbers, what exists today in what's proposed. Don't know that there's a third. Yeah, I think the original [19:32] Chair: The original application had a different overall length. The original application. Replacement in kind of a 4 by 50 foot pier leading to a 3 by 30 gangway landing on a 6 by 20 float located. Okay. So 4 by 50 plus 3 by 30 plus 6 by 20. [19:56] Speaker H (unidentified): Is if [20:01] Jay Obie: if possible to correct the record or correct the or amend the application form, if there's a way tonight to that's what I'm trying to get at, because it's just I just don't [20:18] Chair: want to let a number loose that isn't the correct number, and so that it perpetuates downstream [20:25] Speaker F (unidentified): stream. So I correct if you, if you correct for the record tonight, we'll make sure it gets posted for [20:31] Chair: Public notice, right? So to answer the gentleman's question, the original applicant was 50, 30, and 20, so a total of 100 feet overall. The new structure is was larger, and the drawing said it was 120 feet length overall for the new structure. [20:52] Jay Obie: Length overall, correct. But when I think of, well, be mindful that when they did the survey, the float and the gangway wasn't present. So we don't have an understanding of what those dimensions were. The only thing was picked up during the survey was the dimensions of the metal pier which stays in a fixed location. And when I scale it on the plan, it appears to be four feet wide by 44 feet long, not 50 feet long as would be implied by the project description of being in kind. [21:44] Chair: That's that's what I that's what I so there's that so there's the so what an accurate way to say it would be replacement of a 4 by 44 foot pier with a 4 by 50 foot and plus m plus m plus that's correct okay so that would make it correct but then on the initial write-up that we got it has a notation that the NERPA application includes an additional 20-foot float, so which would be 50 plus 30 plus 20 plus another 20 and that's how you get to 120. [22:27] Jay Obie: Yes, when you look at the proposed conditions plan and you can see the full length taking in account the gangway and the float okay so [22:45] Chair: The goal is to make sure we're all in alignment with the NERPA application okay because that's going to get connected to us because we're going to ask for that application and that approval to go along with your town approval okay so that everybody's sure the same makes sense and that's that's the only reason why I wanted to just real this in again was this kind of like let's make sure we get it right tonight because we shouldn't go to public hearing unless we have it correct all the way across The board agreed Existing condition is 94 feet 44 plus 30 plus 20 I [23:34] Jay Obie: Don't I don't know they I don't know the answer to the I don't know the details relative to the gangway and the float that existed before Okay, [23:55] Chair: So why don't we make a little chart about the numbers that we have so we can compare them side by each. So I had it originally for the description as 100 feet, 50, 30, and 20. The extra 20 comes in when you add on the second outer floating pier, so that's why we get 120 there. There. And what was the NERPA number you just said? That's the 50-30-20 plus 20. It's 20. Okay, so that jives with the 120. So that is the new, and it matches the NERPA. The discrepancy is in the replacement in kind lengths. Yep, and the actual permit application [25:21] Jay Obie: THAT SOUNDS RIGHT, THE APPLICATION ITSELF DOESN'T SAY 120, IT ALSO SAYS 100? [25:33] Chair: YES, IT SAYS 4 BY 50, WELL, I WILL SHOW IT TO YOU. [25:41] Jay Obie: THAT'S OKAY, I DON'T KNOW. [25:43] Chair: WHAT THE APPLICATION SAYS IS THE DESCRIPTION IS REPLACEMENT IN KIND OF A 4 BY 50 FOOT 50 feet, leading to a 3-by-30-foot gangway, 30 feet, landing on a 6-by-20-foot float located by two helical moorings, 50 plus 30 plus 20. So the application description specifies a replacement in kind totaling 100 feet. Okay. The plan set and the NERPA application have 50 plus 30 plus 20 plus another 20. Okay. Equaling 120. So, that needs to be checked. [26:37] Speaker G (unidentified): Right. Okay. All right. [26:38] Chair: We don't, we don't, I don't think anybody can, I don't think anybody can test your intent. we just got to get everything to align with the same number so [26:52] Jay Obie: no note to us is that we need to better align when we have a essentially a third party submitting an application yep i think she typed something up on the fly to quickly try to satisfy that request and that's were okay this got lost yeah so [27:33] Chair: what's the remedy is it a new application cover sheet or we just we just articulated in today's meeting and going forward we recognize that it is 120 feet and the NERPA and the plan set are the operating document okay [Speaker D (unidentified): right] and then in you can also go back with Kim on the administrative task and whatever it is she does in order to track that you call it a scriveness error or however you want to characterize it this is the revision with the number that will be 120 [28:18] Speaker D (unidentified): feet just so it matches hi a quick technical note i'm still not hearing don i apologize [28:31] Speaker E (unidentified): happens when she doesn't turn on her microphone okay I wouldn't worry too much about the [28:41] Speaker D (unidentified): papers just because the microphones are definitely very directed as far as they're picking what they pick up and another thing is that the audience mic that was focusing on the podium IT CORRECTLY DOES PICTURE IN PICTURE ON THE TOWN HALL STREAMS BUT NOT ON ZOOM. SO I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT HIM WHILE HE WAS SPEAKING BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT NOTE THAT IT DOES NOT DO IT ON ZOOM. [29:07] Chair: OKAY. WELL SPOTTED. SO NOW THAT WE SOLVED THAT FIRST ISSUE. OKAY. 120 FEET. 120 FEET. NEXT. [29:23] Jay Obie: NEXT UP IS TO GIVE THE DETAILS WE HAVE SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION TO MAIN DEP AND WE'VE PROVIDED YOU WITH THE APPLICATION NUMBER. WHAT [29:40] Chair: A DEPTH OF THE OUTER MOST FLOAT ZERO FEET, SO IT'S GOING TO BE SKIDS ON WHICH IS FINE BECAUSE THE ONLY QUESTION WE HAD IS TO MAKE SURE THERE WERE NO PERMANENT PEERS OUTSIDE OF THE MEAN LOW WATER MARK. SO YOU SATISFY THAT. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. [30:01] Jay Obie: AND NUMBER FIVE, CERTAINLY NO STRUCTURE INCLUDING TEMPORARY RAMPS OR FLOATS WILL EXTEND MORE THAN HALFWAY TO THE DEEP CHANNEL CENTER LINE. LOOKING, YOU KNOW, THE VIEW PORT, WE CALL IT THE VIEW PORT IN OUR WORLD IN TERMS OF REALLY THE BOX, THE BOX OF THE square but you know looking at even a google earth image it's a long way it's a long way away okay no issue yep we've added the 25 foot setback riparian line plural i mean singular because the one of them is beyond the viewport off the page but the relevant one is there that's [30:46] Chair: to the north side is not shown because it's out of range and the southern one is shown okay and it looks like your pier basically parallels the riparian line all the way [31:02] Jay Obie: okay yep okay and to minimize harm to marsh grass in marine life we've used the floats kids that's what's the best management practice standard okay the reflectors are shown on the pier they're on they're depicted on page co3 that's [31:29] Chair: what we asked for and the elevation is elevation is good to see i think you've checked all the boxes do you have anything else in your notes suzanne i did not karina did you have anything else for the gentleman [31:54] Speaker E (unidentified): no i think if he just sorts up the length issue then we 're good okay so then don so what you're [32:01] Chair: saying is october 20 would be the opportunity to notice that for public hearing correct [32:09] Speaker F (unidentified): that's your next regular meeting and you'll hear other applications at night and we could put this [32:12] Chair: on as a public hearing as well does the gentleman like the 20th for the public hearing that sounds fantastic yeah okay shall we make it so sure ready [Speaker D (unidentified): correct] don't we wanna i mr chairman i make a motion to find application pb 26-07 complete AND READY TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING. ON OCTOBER 20TH. OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION. SECOND. SECOND FROM KARINA. KARINA. YES. SUZANNE. YES. PAUL. YES. OKAY. SO YOU'RE ON THE CALENDAR FOR THE 20TH. OKAY. FANTASTIC. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PUTTING THAT IN. [33:23] Jay Obie: up with us on our av thanks for putting up with us and these discrepancies and stuff at middle yeah but yeah happy to be part of this training session with you guys all right thank [33:36] Chair: You bye-bye. All right, have a good evening. Thank you, and may it snow, but not for like two months, plus in Killington. Okay, yes,. Next up on the agenda was a review in approval of minutes, and those minutes were for September 1st, 2026 six, and Karina, do you have a copy? I [34:15] Speaker D (unidentified): do. Excellent. The PDF for the agenda is handled. That's pretty nice. It's all linked to various PDFs, so I don't have to go sorting through all the pages. Oh, let's [34:28] Chair: see. You can thank you, your new planner, for that. Thank you, Don. Okay, Mr. Chairman, this might [34:38] Speaker F (unidentified): be a good time. I'm so I'm I pulled it up on my phone, the meeting, so I could see from here as well, but I'm wondering, Karina, there's there actually is a volume here that I just noticed. I'm wondering if I can modify this and see if she notices a difference. Make sure it make sure it's not an in-room volume, it's a microphone volume, right? It's not clear to me, so that's why I wanted. So I'm going to turn it down. Does that make any difference, Karina? Nope. That's in room. It's an in-room, it's in room. Okay. Thank you all. [35:07] Chair: Right, let's look at the minutes for September first, 2026. Looking at page one, is there anything on page one? I have two corrections. Line 20. So Mr. Scheiner, it says this afternoon, this afternoon, and then on the line after that, and nobody has read them through the 30 pages entirely. I would remove the word them. Yep. That's all I had. Anything from you, Karina, on page one? [35:46] Speaker D (unidentified): Nope, that's all. She got the afternoon thing. Okay, so [35:53] Chair: the line immediately following says read them through the 30 pages entirely. I would remove the word them. Okay. So over to page two, I have nothing there. Anybody have anything on page two? Nothing heard. Let's go to page number [36:18] Speaker D (unidentified): number three. I thought line 97 was a little bit odd. It just says we said we would likely do a bunch of things. I didn't know if there should be a speaker, like someone saying that, so [36:37] Chair: this was I think this is a summary. This is a this is essentially a summary of a summary. I was going for my notes, and I think Paul and was maybe adding in as well at the ADUs on the farm, but you're right, reading it back, it looks a little vague and rambly. That's me speaking. [37:17] Speaker D (unidentified): Is that part gonna be sorry, one sec, I [37:23] Chair: was I was speaking on behalf of the board because we had discussed doing more work on the ADU question. Can I make a suggestion? Certainly. So on that bullet, which is the 1, 2, 3, 4, the fifth bullet on line 97, you with us, Ellen? Okay. I would strike out the entire first line of that all the way through after the word but, and change it so that it just says we would bring no promise that the resulting document would say two in all places and three on farms but we would bring the level of due diligence we always do to the discussion and [38:12] Speaker D (unidentified): also if this is what Miss Bennett was saying I think that the formatting of it could be a little clearer because I was a little confused because Miss Bennett also spoke but then these bullets below I wasn't sure if those were what she was saying and it just seemed like I'm connected I think that's just a formatting thing it's [38:34] Chair: to tell you the truth there was no value in the line Miss Bennett also spoke so I would strike that I would strike that line entirely because unless you say Miss Bennett spoke and said something otherwise as she spoke and I don't see what that is that's what I'm realizing is [38:52] Speaker D (unidentified): Perhaps what these last three bullets are, what she said. They're not. They're not. Oh, they're not? Yeah, then it doesn't make sense to look for her there if you don't see what she said. So delete that. [39:08] Speaker H (unidentified): Yep. And a caveat here is that I am trying to shorten minutes. Yes. Yeah. And this is kind of a first. [39:22] Chair: Oh, following along for sure. Sure. Which is why I don't feel remiss in striking through a whole thing because we are trying to summarize it for clarity. Yes. Yes. Yes. So you want, we said we would likely do a bunch of things because there are lots of reasons. So all the way through the word, but so that bullet starts with we would bring no promise capital W we and [40:01] Speaker D (unidentified): that's all I know I think this is a good way to handle it I think it's a good start to talk about it [40:10] Speaker E (unidentified): and is there more Ellen is she is some sitting over and I [40:16] Chair: don't know your mic position but I [40:22] Speaker D (unidentified): can't hear her over the mic and I thought she was there, but I couldn't see her. [40:26] Speaker H (unidentified): I keep turning it off so that I'm not interfering. Oh, okay. [40:30] Speaker D (unidentified): All right. But, yes, good job. I think this is a good way to handle it. We'll just try to help you get into the right kind of... [40:40] Speaker H (unidentified): Yes. Oh, I don't mind the critique at all. Well, it's good. [40:44] Chair: We'll get there. It's very good. Yep. So are you good with that change there, Ellen? Right. That one's done. [40:49] Speaker H (unidentified): It starts with we would bring and it ends with to the discussion. Great. [40:57] Chair: So further down the page, what number are you on? I've got 116 and 122. Okay, I don't have 116, but you go with that. So 116, the bullet starts, Mr. Orestes asked how, so that's the bullet. Yep. And it says not as the last possible minute, but it should be not at the last possible minute. Yes. That is correct, thank you. Okay, and then down on line 122, the second, it's a second sentence, the eleventh hour. Yep. I, what it is, was the discussion was about having these things come through late in the 11th hour is not when to discuss this, right, or something. It needs to be a verb, not a is. I put in is not when to discuss this. Yep, you're right. Yep, and I have one more line 135. Who is speaking, please, Mr. And they're going to build a monument to you, Paul, and it should be then read, not the read. [Speaker H (unidentified): Mr. Shiner read.] No, then read through the summaries. Okay. Done. Okay. All right, that's page three. Anything else on page three? Nope. Page four. I note a red on line 154. [42:43] Speaker H (unidentified): I wasn't really sure if that was correct. That was Dawn talking and I was having a hard time hearing it, so she might have said some other word and to go with it. I [43:10] Chair: mean, I think it's fine. I don't, okay. I don't think, I don't see how you could reward that for anything to get anywhere else. No, that's page four. Anything else on page four? Page five. I have a couple of things. I am on the top of the page, one nine zero, coming on comma, please pause until Ms. Emerson is in position. I think coming on is coming into the job. I think, I believe we requested a pause until Miss Emerson is in position, or you know, that was the discussion. So yeah, I remember the discussion that we just said hold until Don is situated, right? Did you want to change something? I thought that was clear the way it was written after those comments with Mr. [44:31] Speaker H (unidentified): Brubaker leaving and Miss Emerson coming on. Please pause until Miss Emerson is in position, then we'll pick up where Mr. Brubaker left off. It seems clear to me, okay? [44:42] Chair: I acquiesce. Okay, I get out of line 199. Now that I'm looking at it, I'm looking at how many are affordable in the market rates. Is it and market rate, affordable, or market rate? [45:04] Speaker H (unidentified): No, you were looking at both. Okay. Because you were talking about the affordability, the state requirement thing. Yep. And then the market rate, which is completely different. [45:17] Chair: How many are affordable and market rate. Okay. Then the only thing I have left is line 209. Who is speaking, please? [45:28] Speaker H (unidentified): Oh, are you a sinner? Bill? [45:33] Chair: That would be Mr. Scheiner making sine waves. Yes. Oh, that's, that's a good one. I like that. Is there anything else on page five? Hearing nothing, we'll go to page six. I have a few. Oh, line 261, it's Gene Wipiski, ski, but [46:06] Speaker H (unidentified): I'm not up bumpus, I don't think the reverse called his [46:13] Chair: name one before. Anyway, got it. Yep, okay. Next line 263, Ms. O'Connor said at the very end of that line it is this year instead of dead duck ready. Yep, 267, middle of the, it's after Ms. Tackett can locate it, said this is going to be as opposed to this going to be before the sidewalk. Okay, that's what I got. I'll take you to the top of the page to line 230. You got double periods at the end of the sentence. [47:03] Speaker H (unidentified): I'll take you to the next line 231. Nothing. Oh, that's where the period is. [47:10] Chair: There's no period there, and also you were talking about the guidance of Vanessa Ivey, and it was actually the team up is Vanessa and Sarah Turner, and the other team is [47:26] Speaker H (unidentified): Ivey. So how do you want me to change it? Vanessa and Sarah? I mean, that's, I'm taking this from what I read or heard in the minutes. Then the three people who were in the [47:49] Chair: this, actually I believe the plan has spoken to two. You've spoken to Vanessa and [47:54] Speaker F (unidentified): Ivy, you haven't spoken to Sarah. I spoke actually with Sarah and Ivy. Sorry. Okay, so [48:03] Chair: just in terms of the listing of the three names, just if you can arrange them so that Vanessa and Sarah are one team, comma, and Ivy. Do just do it this way, Vanessa and Sarah, comma, as well as Ivy. Yes. Okay, hold on. Well done, that's clear. You get that, Ellen? Okay, done. [Speaker G (unidentified): I'm] good. Okay, so over to page 7. I don't see anything. Nope, nothing here. Nobody? And okay. That being the case. Mr. Chair, I make a motion that we accept the minutes of September 1st, 2026 as amended. Second. First and the second from Karina. Thank you. [49:15] Speaker H (unidentified): Karina? Yes. Suzanne? Yes. Paul? Yes. Thank you guys. [49:23] Chair: Okay, notice a decision for eight Wisteria. I had two copies in my packet, I assume that they were just a duplicate, there's no differences. I [49:39] Speaker H (unidentified): only had one, so okay. I wouldn't, I've only sent in one, so it's probably just a duplicate. Okay, [49:45] Chair: just to do just a printing duplicate. All right, let's review that just to see if there was anything we found on page one. I'm [50:02] Speaker D (unidentified): real quick, there's a little issue with missing a space in between the address of Riverside Pickering Marine and as his representatives, just should be a space there. So you're [50:20] Chair: looking for an additional like a hard return between Riverside and Pickering Marine? Yeah, so [50:29] Speaker D (unidentified): 1a, it has the address for horse side pickering and marine contractors, and then after the zip it, that has no space in between, see, it just, as his, it needs to, it just needs to be right there. [50:43] Chair: We see that, we, well spotted, well spotted. That was good. [50:52] Speaker H (unidentified): Excuse me. Even my computer didn't pick that one up, Karina. [51:00] Speaker D (unidentified): Aha, the power of my eyes. [51:03] Chair: Okay, it's a super power. Okay, anything else on that front page? I had nothing on the second page. I had one thing. What is that one thing? Submitted for September 15th. Dawn Emerson, do you spell your name with two M's or one? Oh, no. One. One. [51:24] Speaker H (unidentified): Sorry. I will remember that. That's what I found. Have I misspelled it any other time? [51:32] Chair: No, I went back and looked to see on the front page. I don't believe you did. Okay. OKAY. THAT'S PAGE 2. ANYTHING ON PAGE 3? I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. OKAY. NOTHING ON PAGE 3. I HAVE OVER TO PAGE 4. [Speaker D (unidentified): I HAVE NOTHING.] I HAD NO CORRECTIONS ON PAGE 4. KARINA, ANYTHING FROM YOU? [52:09] Speaker D (unidentified): I'M STILL GIVING ANOTHER LOOK OVER. OKAY. [52:16] Chair: PAGE 5. I HAD NO CORRECTIONS. NOPE. OKAY. SO THOSE COUPLE OF MINOR THINGS, ELLEN, AND I THINK WE'RE GOOD. [52:43] Speaker H (unidentified): OKAY. I GOT THEM ALL IN THERE. KARINA, YOU WANT TO MAKE THE MOTION? [52:48] Speaker D (unidentified): OH, I DON'T HAVE A MOTION TEMPLATE. THAT'S ONE THAT I'M MISSING. [52:53] Chair: YOU WANT TO TAKE A STAB AT IT OR I CAN DO IT? [53:01] Speaker D (unidentified): SORRY, I CAN'T READ IT OFF Mr. [53:07] Chair: Chair, I move that the Planning Board approve Notice of Decision for PB26-06 Shoreland Zoning Permit Application, New Residential Pier, Gangway, and Float as amended. Second. Okay. First and second. Ellen? [53:29] Speaker D (unidentified): All right. Karina? Yes. Yes. Suzanne? Yes. Paul? Yes. Thank you for that, Suzanne. If I did have the motion template, I would have liked to have read it. But yeah, no such luck this time. [53:44] Chair: Okay. I'll get you a cheat sheet. Okay. That works. So other business and correspondence, I think we'll turn this over to Dawn for comments. [53:58] Speaker D (unidentified): Make sure your microphone's on. [54:04] Speaker F (unidentified): So these are just a few things that we touched on at a prior meeting, and all I've done is simply add some draft language to the existing ordinances to achieve the goal for each. So in the first one, it's regarding the plenty board bylaws, and under meetings, number five, there are, and you all have this red line document. So it's a proposal to say that the meetings start at 6 and that they'll end at 8, and essentially at 7.30, you'll pause the meeting to determine if there's going to be adequate time to review all of the items on the remaining agenda, and either continue those items to the next meeting, or you could opt to go after your ending time of 8 o'clock. So that's on a case-by-case basis, but if you don't waive it, then you'll end at 8. [55:03] Chair: Can I ask just a question? So under sub 3, meeting duration, no new business will be taken up by the board after 7.30. So when I look at the way the agenda is structured, there's a lot of stuff that is on the agenda after new business. So if we're going to have 7.30 as our time marker in new business, it just seems strange to me because new business comes before old business, it becomes before minutes, so it leaves... It's not new business, it's just business. Any business. Okay. That was my question. So that leaves the entire meeting for new business and only less than 30 minutes for all the rest of the stuff. [55:51] Speaker F (unidentified): That's not the intention. Okay. Great. [55:53] Chair: Correct that all business is what Paul you just indicated correct yes no business or no agenda items or something like that it doesn't have to be an agenda oh it could be business no business great okay so thank you for that I was concerned beautiful I think Carmela will be happy with this [56:17] Speaker H (unidentified): Yes I will be happy with this I was shocked to be perfectly honest with you but that's this has been an ongoing discussion for decades trying to get this in well let us try to make a change thank you [56:31] Speaker D (unidentified): Thank you I would prefer not to have meetings that end at nine forty seven oh yeah [56:39] Speaker H (unidentified): They're way too long okay [56:45] Speaker F (unidentified): So what we'll what we'll do is we'll add this and my understanding is this has to go to the town meeting when you put forth the items the select no I'm sorry [56:55] Speaker G (unidentified): Sorry, this is the bylaws. No, this is bylaws. [56:57] Chair: This is select board approved and gets posted on the footer of the planning page. [57:08] Speaker F (unidentified): It says bylaws are amended by a four-member vote of the entire voting membership of the planning board. So is it past practice that it goes to the? [57:20] Chair: Yeah, because I believe they have to sign it. Yes, they do. [57:25] Speaker H (unidentified): Do. They are the final approval. We just went through that not too long ago. [57:33] Chair: We want to do and they say yes or no. Okay. So do we have to wait until Carmela's back because we need four people to approve it? If that's the case, you do have to wait until Carmela comes back. [57:45] Speaker F (unidentified): Okay. I'll scan through them again too to see if there's anything else that we can. [57:49] Chair: Okay. I'm sure she would be thrilled to have this. I don't think it's an issue, it's just a matter of getting a signature, yes. [57:58] Speaker F (unidentified): Okay, then moving on, discussion of abutters notices. So in the ordinance under site plan, chapter 33, 129 says public hearing. I struck the word generally, it's not clear to me why it says that. [58:15] Speaker H (unidentified): Oh. Where are you? On the administration page? [58:19] Chair: 33-129, public hearing. The page says page 10 of 36. [58:27] Speaker H (unidentified): Oh, I've got the wrong page. Oh, I've got the wrong side. [58:31] Chair: Yeah, that's weird, huh? That word generally? Yeah, I know. [58:36] Speaker F (unidentified): Because it implies that you may or may not have a public hearing, but my understanding is you have a public hearing. So for clarity, that's how I read it. That's how it makes sense to me. But if you that's not clear you want me to look into it any aspect of it. I'm happy to do so. [58:52] Chair: I think that has a legal ramification I've never seen it. The word generally. [59:07] Speaker H (unidentified): Or I don't think I have what you're talking about. [59:12] Chair: For public hearings, so it's a it's a it's a page with a line the first thing on the page is a line all the way across in the first paragraph the first words on the page say applicant all fees paid by the town okay I don't have it they were it was. [59:29] Speaker F (unidentified): Linked in the agenda maybe you didn't get a print copy I didn't get the print copy so do you have a concern Paul that I. [59:46] Chair: Can't put my finger on it something tells me that has a legal implication in that public hearings in other words without the generally is an out and that you can do something else yeah be modified or something can happen generally without that there it's. [1:00:11] Speaker G (unidentified): Like this is the way it is it's right shall there's no flexibility built in at. [1:00:16] Speaker F (unidentified): all oh it's like shall isn't shall versus me is it one of those deals yeah it says shall in both statements plenty board shall schedule public hearing and then the representative shall attend so i 'm not falling on my sword for this i raised it you know i put it in there for discussion there's nothing that requires it to be removed it just to me seem made it seem ambiguous i [1:00:40] Chair: I, we'll run it, let's run it down and see if, because anything that goes into ordinance for change goes to council first. See if council has any problem with that. Okay. [1:00:56] Speaker F (unidentified): And then below that, section 33-130 was what we previously talked about, notifying abutters by regular mail and not certified. [1:01:06] Chair: I was going to just ask for a clarifier of like USPS, because when you say it, what kind of mail is it? Email? Is it snail mail? It's USPS first class or a whole first class standard letter, do? [1:01:33] Speaker H (unidentified): I need to give this back. No, you can have. Okay, thanks. And [1:01:39] Speaker F (unidentified): then the fee schedule would need to be adjusted with that currently. So [1:01:51] Chair: can I just, can we just go back to the mail for a moment? So it's only, it, I feel like I'm screaming, so I apologize. Abutters shall be notified by USPS first class mail. That's what we're suggesting we change it to. But in the sentence above it's 10 days before such a hearing. So are we gonna get into a twist here in that the mail locally has been so undependable that it is entirely possible that things go in the mail and take far longer than ten days to get to someone's home? The law is that [1:02:32] Speaker F (unidentified): we, it has to be mailed within ten days and we don't have any control after that. Okay, so in, if in, if butters don't get it, the board's decision isn't nullified. Okay, I mean, you could make accommodations on a case-by-case basis, but it's also in other [1:02:48] Chair: places, right? It's posted online, it's posted on the town web. Okay, so it's not, I just wanted to bring that up, that the U.S. mail is not what it used to be, the deliverability. In the beginning of the sentence too says at least. Okay, so there's some legal room there. I just wanted to have that brought up. Thank you. Yeah, okay, then I'm good. And I will say, and I, we may have touched on this before, [1:03:17] Speaker F (unidentified): is that a lot of certifieds come back? Yeah, whereas the regular mail don't. So the address is clearly the correct address, but they choose not to sign forward or something. Yeah, okay, got it, very good. Okay, so that's pretty standard except for the generally. I'm going to look more into to that. But like I said, it's not critical. It was my observation. So either way, it will be fine. Then sketch plan requirements. The ordinance currently says shall, as opposed to making it an option for sketch plan. And some projects are small and don't necessitate a sketch plan. It's nice to always make it an option and encourage the applicant. But I think there are definitely times when it's not necessary and it's a whole extra meeting for the board in the applicant so [1:04:19] Chair: this first sentence is new. The applicant may request a pre [1:04:27] Speaker H (unidentified): application, right? Correct. Okay, so that's a new thought and [1:04:35] Chair: Then what you're talking about is subsequently the planning board will determine whether the sketch plan should the word plan be left in or should the word plan be struck out. Either I would feel it flies with this article and with [1:04:59] Speaker F (unidentified): other municipal. The idea is you always want to get people to come in before they're vested in like their engineering expenses or their design, you know, when it when it is loose so that there can be a discussion when they don't that already have their heels dug in. So we always want to encourage there was discussion when you [1:05:18] Speaker H (unidentified): guys were doing like the mixed use zone and the comp plan where you were you were wanting to do things like this and I know that Jeff was reviewing plans ahead of time. Yeah he's [1:05:31] Chair: pre-qualifying. Yes yeah that's that's an efficiency for the board. Yes so that we only rephrase it, I mean he even started before he left with the project in the mixed use zone with a new checklist providing applicant feedback in terms of you know you don't comply apply here and here when we maybe need more information on this that and the other thing and that just it's to get you a more complete package once it comes to the board. Yes it's a bit more it's as rounded as we would need to begin our process. I don't [1:06:31] Speaker F (unidentified): have any issue. There's no decisions being made tonight, we've discussed it generally, I've just proposed what the language would look like so there you can chew on that for a meeting or two. The next item we had on here was daycare provisions and I did pull the language and was looking we're looking into proposed changes to the table of uses and to make sure that there wasn't any other zoning because it has to be consistent with what how you zone single family use. So I don't have that language for you tonight. Okay I'll probably hand out that at the October 20th meeting for [1:07:04] Chair: discussion at the November workshop. Oh good and footnote that's tied into a July 27 requirements [1:07:14] Speaker F (unidentified): correct to be codified correct that's part of the statutory requirements and then the last thing was just the planning board work plan which I've worked on updating adding in some extra dates we wanted to know hey what are optional dates if we needed them and I'm meeting tomorrow with the consultant one of the two consultants for the work in the village districts and then I'm in communication with the other consultants so I'll know before your next meeting what that time frame looks like Working with them because that was, that was really, I think, weighted the most were those changes because of statutory requirements and because we're working in the village mixed MAKES USE. We have applications coming in, so I will have that updated including the daycare, and then we already had called out previously items for the 27th. I'm sorry, for 2027. So that's really all I had for tonight, partly because I had a pre scheduled time out of the office, so there was a week that I wasn't here to continue to work on some of this stuff, but I don't think the priorities have changed at all, unless you have something that [1:08:29] Chair: I'm going to mention a couple of things that occurred, one of which is it was festival day, it was fairly light attendance because of the weather, so I had plenty of time to chat up my colleagues on the conservation commission who are in the table next to me. And one of the things I wanted to bring forward for contemplation of the board is that as we get into some of these larger projects, for example, in the mixed-use zone, and because of recent summertime issues with Kittery water with regards to restrictions on water usage, it occurs to me that we will have a fairly decent amount of landscaping in a new development, as well as we had conversations about requirements for park shed areas, and so my question to the conservation folks that were there Chair Eggleston was there was, is there any consideration that we should be giving to the top two topics, one is reuse of gray water for irrigation. Gray water being the water from hand sinks or the laundry machine that can be collected and can be part of a in-ground system. You cannot use gray water above ground, but only through like drip irrigation, is there a way in which this could play into our mixed-use development in these higher density situations, the upside is obviously it reduces the volume of water going into the sewer system and it does allow you to have creative reuse of what was potable water but has been used lightly in his gray water for your irrigation needs that are subterranean. So, not sprinklers that are doing the lawn, you can't do that, but Systems where there is seasonal in-ground, if you have a flower bed or something, or if you do have in-ground irrigation for your lawn in a public area, that could be a candidate for graywater use. The second question was, what about stormwater collection? We have stormwater coming down and it's coming off of these buildings and it's going into downspouts and it is controlled to a certain extent. Where does that go? Where is it ponded? Is it kept in a retention pond? If it is in a retention pond, is it something that could be suitable for reuse? Use and stormwater collection does not have the same requirement as gray water does. Stormwater can be reused for above ground sprinklers and you know in the air if you will, but again an irrigation for landscaping or if there's a fountain or something of that nature. The whole premise is to reduce dependency on water from Kittery Water for these types of locations. And there may be also other things. There's LEED certification that they have for using the correct kinds of materials in the buildings. L-E-E-D. The lead, yep, and there are certain efficiencies to be had in terms of the types of windows you use or the kinds of materials, its consistencies in that they are favored materials. We haven't discussed any of that and I don't want to discuss any of that at this time, but it's all within this category of we're allowing this kind of building to happen, we're allowing the higher density, what other things should we be aware of, and I think the water question is up front and I think conservation Commission should weigh in on that and that's why I mentioned the two of them at the festival day, maybe they'd like to have a chat about that and they have a meeting I believe tomorrow night and I was thinking of meeting, going to their meeting to pose that question to them in that forum so it's documented and for me to do that I believe I should have the consensus of the board if that's something that we'd like to pursue with them so what would that so what is it that we are asking are we asking that as a committee they encourage it because right now you can't require it right it's not an award you can't require it doesn't mean we can't encourage things we can't suggest them we can't ask them as have you considered this right we are able to do that i think we are but i'm not i'm not the one to I'm not going to operate independently of the board so that's, that's what I'm trying to, so you Would like the conservation commission to be on board and they can also encourage and suggest So this I would, I would expect, yeah, I would view this as a collaborative opportunity because the Planning Board can propose ordinance. The Conservation Commission typically doesn't propose ordinance the same way we do, especially with what we've just recently done with the mixed-use zone, all the way starting with the fee-based system. So I would consider this kind of a next step for the Planning Board in really trying to button up what goes on in the mixed use zone and suggesting a discussion with our colleagues about what do you know about greywater and or stormwater collection and does that have value for us to discuss further. So my sense from what you've said is it certainly the water landscaping collection reuse, given all the issues with the Kittery water and sewer over the summer, I think that is a great thing to pursue and come to like a joint approach. approach. I think lead certification is, in the little bit I know, is a very large category of stuff. And so maybe this would be a stepwise thing, like the water seems more something to get our arms around more quickly and the lead certification super interesting loads have been done in industries I know lead certification is has been underway for years and years and years I've worked in buildings and in projects that have them or get them or promote them but I mean that's way bigger than a bread box and it's really outside of our purview it's way outside of our purview however it's just like it's a it's a it's an interesting data point when you're reviewing an application yeah if there's any sensitivity or awareness of it yes what does that mean but the water is a separate issue of which I think we can I think yeah we could work on that yeah I [1:17:41] Speaker F (unidentified): guess what Mr. Chairman I so what I'm hearing you say is there's a Conservation Commission meeting tomorrow night which is accurate and you wanted to attend to discuss the topic of the gray water the Conservation Commission would the goal ultimately then be the collaboration to come up with some regulation pertaining to it or criteria standard [1:17:58] Chair: Well first and foremost, if I go representing the planning board, I have to be duly authorized to represent the board on the matter. So I asked the board if I would have their support on that. If the answer is yes, then the question to the conservation commission is, do you, do you have any expertise knowledge within your group? If so, what can you share and tell us about it? And does this make sense for us to have further conversations on the subject? As I say, given the circumstances of water could be an issue. Okay, so it's a conversation starter, and depending what information is gathered, it's, it's literally just a, an [1:18:47] Speaker F (unidentified): opportunity to discuss scenarios. Okay, I would normally be happy to attend that meeting. I attended their last meeting. I'm not available tomorrow night, but could attend some future meetings? Absolutely. [1:19:03] Chair: And so I think, again, tomorrow my idea would be five minutes, just as we've done here, thank you very much, and move on from there. And depending upon how they feel on the matter, it may become something that we take up later, or maybe we just table it and say, [1:19:27] Speaker D (unidentified): not now this [1:19:30] Speaker G (unidentified): could be incredibly important. Yep, Karina, do you have any thoughts on that? Only [1:19:37] Speaker D (unidentified): fine with you representing us. I think you are just as good as any of us to do so, if [1:19:44] Chair: not better, so go for it. Okay, all right, well I will do that then, and I'll report back. Okay, [1:19:54] Speaker D (unidentified): okay, and I do like the idea of more cross-board communication to try and like keep all of us on the same page, and I think the conservation Commission in general has a lot of the same [1:20:06] Chair: goals that we do. Absolutely, and remember how that particular Zone is not real, it's not in the shoreland zone, so it's not protected, so that's why we 're relying on them to be the monitors and the guardians. Okay, that's all I had. Anyone else? I have, I have a motion to adjourn. Is there [1:20:42] Speaker G (unidentified): a second from Karina? Yes. Suzanne? Yes. Paul? Yeah. Yes. Great, thank you all. [1:20:56] Speaker D (unidentified): Thank you, Karina. Have a good night everybody. Good night. Yes, [1:21:06] Speaker F (unidentified): it is. I wanted to mess around with this a little bit more, but I didn't know how to do that without being recorded. The things that I had noted, that was that we requested pardon for into the microphone levels should be boosted. We were getting feedback from the podium mike, and it definitely didn't, wasn't moving with the speaker all the time, because Paul was speaking quite a bit at one point, and it was, and it stayed on me. There's some delay, but then they're all there. Also appears to be no change Was that did that seem like what everyone was seeing? It was funny though to look at, but yeah, it does appear. [1:21:45] Speaker H (unidentified): Appear to be, yeah, there's a I was building it up and down and there was some of. [1:22:02] Chair: These are quite a bit taller. Oh, they're not quite tall, they're still not tall enough. I can't I can't. [1:22:08] Speaker E (unidentified): Tell if that's one of the so those are short, they make the. [1:22:24] Chair: Running table, okay. [1:23:36] Speaker F (unidentified): And I know that Kim indicated she was going to watch, and then Eric. I didn't see them on there, but it's reported, so I suspect that's what they were due. I'll pass this information along and see what they noticed as well. Yeah, it's a little tricky to not see. I kept looking over my shoulder to see what Zoom was seeing because all I could see was here. But it seemed pretty easy to watch it on the phone, so I don't know how many people at home do that. [1:29:53] Chair: There were many things that he was able to have.