►
From YouTube: April 8, 2021 Planning Board Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
A
E
A
I
didn't
hear
drew
sorry,
oh
I
I
saw
you
wave.
Are
you
on
mute,
drew.
A
A
So
the
purpose
of
this
hearing
is
to
review
and
approve,
and
now
this
has
been,
as
you
all
know,
a
long
effort
over
the
last
several
months
to
kind
of
do
a
wholesale
editing
and
revision
of
our
chapter
13
code.
A
Basically
how
we're
doing
this
is
in
pieces
and
so
manager,
marker
and
others
have
contributed
to
all
of
these
revisions
and
we've
had
the
opportunity
to
review
these
in
pieces
as
we
went
along,
as
I
said
many
months
of
effort,
and
it
only
addresses
the
like
the
administrative
portions
of
our
ordinance.
A
You
know
things
like
the
land
use
table
and
other
processes
that
we
have
to
dig
into
and
revise
will
come
later.
So
you
have
that
in
your
packet
and
I'd
like
to
just
for
the
record
offer
my
kudos
to
manager
marker
and
the
staff.
A
A
So
at
this
point
I
guess
what
I
would
like
to
do
is
open
it
up
to
mr
marker
or
mr
merchant
for
for
your
presentation
of
the
changes
and
then
the
board
will
ask
questions.
Let
me
ask
first:
are
there
any?
Are
there
any
interested
parties
attending
by
zoom
tonight
I
don't
see
any
other
attendees.
A
Okay,
very
good:
have
there
been
any
okay?
You
already
said:
no,
no
emails
phone
calls
no
written
correspondence
to
enter
into
the
record,
all
right.
So
with
that
will
it
be
mr
marker
or
mr
murchison
who'll
be
presenting.
B
I
received
a
lengthy
amount
of
comments
from
mr
chair
and
also
from
board
member
solomon
and
I'm
happy
to
go.
I
believe
those
were
all
sent
out
previously
to
the
meeting
tonight
and
so
you've
had
a
chance
to
look
at
those.
B
I
personally
didn't
have
any
concerns
with
the
latest
ones
that
went
out
from
christine.
I
think
we
can
incorporate
those
fairly
easily
into
the
document
and,
as
you
pointed
out,
this
covers
much
more
of
the
administrative
aspects
of
the
code,
who's
responsible
for
it,
the
zoning
map
and
how
we
deal
with
that.
How
we
deal
with
amendments
to
the
zoning
ordinances
and
the
maps,
the
definitions
that
we
are
going
to
apply
throughout
the
code
and
so
on?
B
A
Yeah,
well,
I
think
we've
all
had
ample
opportunity
to
to
go
through
and
on
multiple
occasions.
So
at
this
point
we
can
turn
it
over
to
the
board
for
specific
questions
or
comments.
A
B
That's
why
this
ordinance
is
is
written
such
that
we
are
supplanting
the
current
ordinance
with
this
text.
So
you
don't
you'd
have
to
actually
read
down
through
all
of
this
and
the
current
code.
If
you
wanted
to
see
all
of
the
changes,
but
this
is
basically
considered
rewrite,
and
so
we're
just
adopting
this
new
text,
as
is
rather
than
trying
to
demonstrate
all
of
the
changes
that
that
were
done
with
it.
A
All
right,
thank
you
dennis.
Are
there
any
questions
from
the
board
members.
A
Next
item
on
the
agenda
is
for
us
to
discuss.
So
are
there
any
comments
from
the
board
members.
A
With
respect
to
approving
these
this,
this
revision.
D
I
guess
it's
one
of
the
bits
that
I
sent
in
dennis's.
Well,
what
I
reviewed
that
dennis
sent
us
was
the
issue
about
the
waivers
of
certain
elements
of
the
site,
design
review.
So
if
we
were,
you
know
this
happened
earlier
in
the
year
about.
D
Well,
what
elements
can
we
wave
or
what
elements
should
be
there
based
on?
Maybe
the
size
of
the
project
and
smaller
projects
might
not
need
everything
in
that
site.
Design
review,
I'm
just
concerned
about
you
know
it
being
arbitrary
and
so
a
project
comes
to
us.
I
mean
oh,
we'll
wave
that,
but
then
we'll
have
the
next
project
come
to
us
and
say
well
we're
not
waving
that
and-
and
we
need
to
be
able
to
have
good
reasons
behind.
D
Why
we're
why
we're
waiving
certain
requirements,
so
that
was
one
part
that
I
had
major
you
know
concern
on
was
well
just
we
can't
have
free
free
reigns
whatever
we
want,
because
the
you
do
get
into
maybe
even
legal
territory
where
we're
not
being
equal.
D
Equally
we're
not
equally
adjudicating
these
these
projects,
so
my
I
guess
proposal
was
that
you
know
right
now.
We
have
preliminary
site
design
review
and
then
we
have
a
final
site
design
review.
If,
in
that
preliminary
hearing,
that
person
would
apply
actually
apply
and
say.
I
want
the
planning
board
to
wave
this
because
and
then
we
can
say:
okay,
we
can
waive
that
and
then,
when
we
get
to
the
final
review,
that's
already
been
waived,
we're
not
looking
for
it
and
and
we
have
a
back
up
behind
why
we
did
what
we
did.
A
Yeah,
that's
that's
a
good!
That's
a
good
input
christine
and
I
and
we've
talked
about
waivers
in
the
past
and
and
and
agreed
and
practice.
D
A
Even
though
the
the
ordinance
allows
us
to
waive
requirements,
and
it
gives
no
standards
for
what
the
criteria
would
be,
that
we
decided
as
a
group
that
in
practice
we
would
not
wave
requirements,
but
the
ordinance
still
says
that
we
can
wait.
I.
D
So
I
know
I
tried
to
bring
up
mine
where
it
was,
but
it's
further.
E
D
D
C
A
D
A
That
that
that
wasn't,
that
wasn't
the
issue.
The
issue
was
waiving
like
the
document
requirements
for
yeah.
D
A
C
D
Ordinance
part
of
it
so,
but
I
did
want
to
bring
that
up
anyway,
as
we
go
through
this,
so.
A
Okay,
look
at
let's
see
here,
I've
got
it
it's
in
it's
in
hearings.
A
Me
up
near
the
beginning:
item
item
15.
sure.
D
D
Of
you
know
just
some
type
of
supporting
supporting
that
that
we're
prepared
for
when,
when
we
are
there
and
that
the
applicant
is
prepared
for
also
because.
B
Think
we
need
to
be
clear
that
I
think
the
intent
here
was
that
this
waiver
under
number
15,
is
referring
more
to
the
procedures
of
conducting
a
public
hearing,
not
the
requirements
of
the
applications.
Oh
yeah,
okay,
but
we
could
certainly
change
the
term
here.
Instead
of
saying
the
board
may
wave,
we
could
say
the
board
may
amend.
D
B
D
A
A
Not
statutory
right,
so
we
were
talk.
We
were
talking
more
in
the
context
of
you
know
when
somebody
when
somebody
comes
in
with
a
with
their
concept
plan,
or
you
know,
a
final
plan,
you
know
you
have
all
that
that
whole
long
list
of
requirements
and
somewhere
in
the
ordinance
that
well
at
least
we've
we've
discussed
this
on
multiple
occasions.
A
You
know
whether
we're
going
to
require
all
of
that
or
whether
we
have
the
authority
to
let
people
off
the
hook
and
not
necessarily
bring
everything
and
specifically
things
like
engineered
stamped
drawings
and
all
of
that,
if
somebody's
building
a
shed
in
their
backyard.
That
cannot
be
that's
just
way,
overkill
right,
so
that
those
types
of
situations
are
what
we
want
to
be
able
to
wave,
but
anyway,
all
right.
Well,
that
that's
a
that's
a
good
comment,
christina,
I
think
that's
something
we
still
have
to
resolve
for
sure.
B
A
A
B
D
I
didn't
understand
that
that
number
b
letter
b,
I
didn't
understand
really
what
that.
D
B
Only
these
things
that
the
city
is
going
to
use
all
of
its
means
possible
to
make
sure
that
things
are
getting
cleaned
up,
which
might
include
a
consent
agreement
where
we
give
somebody
time
frames
to
to
act
or
to
clean
up
a
certain
percentage
of
things,
and
that
will
will
utilize
any
of
the
steps
necessary
or
that
we're
able
to
use
in
those.
D
B
D
B
So
if
somebody
came
in
and
asked
if
they
could
build,
say
a
a
retaining
wall
along
their
property
line,
so
they
can
well
so
that
they
could
do
a
major
cut
along
their
property
line
and
put
a
retaining
wall
in
and
the
staff
that
they
spoke
with
said
you
know
what
that
sounds
like
a
really
good
idea.
Go
for
it,
and
I'd
come
to
find
out
after
the
retaining
wall
is
built
and
is
now
holding
the
neighbor's
property
up
in
the
air.
So
to
speak,
that
zoning
code
or
their
construction
standards
would
say.
B
E
B
G
Dennis's
example
of
a
retaining
wall
is
that's
a
that's
a
true
story.
We
have
one
in
lafayette
that
the
property
owner
was
complaining
about
a
neighbor,
so
I
went
to
check
it
out
and
I
found
myself
looking
over
this
retaining
wall
that
was
built
within
a
foot
of
the
property
line,
so
no
regard
to
any
kind
of
structural
setbacks.
G
G
B
Some
of
this
is
is
carryover
language.
I
can
tell
you
that,
but
technically
under
the
language,
that's
there
is.
If
you're
out
grading,
I-
and
I
think
again,
this
comes
down
to
the
matter
of
terms
versus
intent.
I
think
the
intent
is,
if
you're
going
to
start
cutting
a
big
swath
through
the
middle
of
property
and
doing
some
major
recontourings
and
you
need
to
get
a
permit.
B
F
Maybe
just
their
intent
or
some
sort
of
exemption
as
far
as
you
know,
their
if
you're
in
some
sort
of,
if
you're,
just
grading
your
driveway,
your
own
personal
property,
not
necessarily
your
own
personal
property,
but
if
you're,
creating
your
your
your
driveway,
some
sort,
some
sort
of
language
like
that
that
it's
not
necessarily
like
you,
like
you
say,
dennis
you
know,
cutting
a
swathe
through
your
yard
to
a
to
another
area.
F
You
know
that
that
would-
and
that
would
include
some
sort
of
permit
for
sure.
But
if
somebody's
adding
you
know
gravel
or
something
to
their
driveway,
just
to
build
it
up
or
or
something
like
that,
where
it's
not
a
certain
means,
I
guess
where
you're
not
adding
like
10
or
12
dump
trucks
worth
of
gravel.
H
Yeah
I
gotta
I
got
to
comment
on
this.
The
the
the
the
way
this
is
written
doesn't
really
looks
like
it
includes
anything
to
do
with
maintenance
activities
which
are
which
it
really
should
because
you're
gonna
have
you
know
every
spring.
You're
gonna
need
to
do
things
on
certain
parcels
of
property,
and
do
you
want
to
I
mean?
Are
you
going
to
exempt
agricultural
roads?
I
mean
forestry
roads
that
aren't
public
roads.
H
H
A
A
G
There
are
standards
on
parking
and
roads
in
our
city
ordinance
and
really
meant
to
be
when
you're
constructing
them.
For
instance,
you
wouldn't
exceed
a
grade
of
eight
percent
entering
onto
a
public
way,
a
public.
G
B
Beyond
the
element
of
roads,
you
also
have
standards
in
the
ordinance
right
now
that
talk
about
preservation
of
landscaping,
of
protection
of
water
sources
and
water
channels,
protecting
of
view,
corridors
ridge
lines,
there's
there's
more
of
those
native
aspects
of
land
preservation
or
vegetation
preservation
that
the
ordinance
talks
about,
and
I
I
fully
get
where
you're
coming
from.
If
you've
got
a
50
acre
piece
of
ground
and
again
you
cut
a
tree
in
the
middle
of
the
woods
and
nobody's
around
who's
going
to
hear
it.
B
H
All
that
stuff's
exempted
under
the
dep
stormwater
law
already,
so
you
know,
I
that's
why
you
know
do
you?
Do
you
really
need
to
get
a
a
city
permit
to
do
it?
I
mean
I
could
see
on
new
construction.
A
lot
of
this
makes
sense,
but
I
mean
are
the
landscape
companies
that
put
in
a
new
lawn
for
somebody
and
regrade?
It
I
mean.
Are
they
going
to
have
to
get
permits,
or
I
mean
I
guess
I
guess
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
what
the
intent
is
here.
B
I
I
think,
it's
again
it's
more
dealing
with
somebody.
That's
going
to
go
in
and
they're
trying
to
move
a
mountain
or
half
a
mountain
and
there's
there's
concern
about
how
is
that
affecting
the
drainage
on
the
area,
the
adjacent
property
owners,
the
potentially
the
cultural
resources
that
the
ordinance
serves
to
try
to
protect
if
somebody's
just
doing
something
on
their
own
for
their
own
purposes?
B
A
Well,
maybe
we
can
come
up
with
some
some
some
revised
wording
to
capture
that
that
intent
better,
at
least
to
clarify
it.
B
So
that
there
is
a
catch-all
in
this
paragraph
that
says,
if
you're
doing
that
work
without
a
valid
and
current
local
permit,
as
required
under
these
ordinances,
then
it's
a
violation
if
the
ordinance,
if
somewhere
else
in
the
ordinances,
it's
not
required
for
x
y
z,
type
of
grading
or
construction
on
your
lot,
then
then
this
doesn't
apply
and
it's
it's
not
a
violation
of
the
code.
You
don't
have
to
worry
about
it.
It
really
comes
down
again
to
what
are
the
other
standards
that
are
going
to
be
adopted.
A
Oh
and
that's
you
know,
and
that
and
that's
a
problem
I
think-
and
it's
a
universal
problem.
I
think
with
all
of
these
types
of
codes
is
that
different
aspects
of
a
certain
thing
are
scattered
all
over
the
document
and
it
requires
a
a
phd
and
you
know,
zoning
law
to
understand
and
go
through
and
find
it
on,
and
you
and
then
you
end
up
finding
all
kinds
of
inconsistencies
and
one
will
contradict
the
other
and
I'm
sure
we
have
still
in
our
own
newtons.
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
Well,
so
I'll,
just
I'll
kind
of
summarize
for
in
the
interest
of
time
here
and
we
can
go
back
and
review
it,
but
some
of
the
major
things
that
I
saw
as
I
went
through.
A
Of
course,
I'm
a
little
bit
go
over
a
little
a
little
bit
overboard
on
grammar
and
spelling
and
all
that
kind
of,
and
the
word
smithing.
So
there's
a
lot
of
that
in
what
I
submitted.
But
you
know,
some
of
the
bigger
items
are
like
making
sure
that
the
process
in
this
part
of
the
ordinance
is
consistent
with
our
practice,
and
so
just
a
simple
example
is
you
know
the
the
agenda
for
our
board
meetings?
A
You
know
it
lays
out
what
the
agenda
is,
the
order
of
things
and
we
don't
do
it
that
way,
and
so
we
either
need
to
change
the
way
we
do
things
or
make
the
ordinance
consistent
with
our
actual
practice.
A
One
of
the
major
concerns
I
have-
and
we
talked
about
this
before
and
and
I
can't
remember
whether
we
had
a
consensus
from
the
board
or
not,
but
within
our
processes
I
think
it
it
references
in
your
revisions.
It
references
now,
a
10-day,
I
guess
window
for
for
a
10,
a
yeah,
a
10-day
deadline
for
somebody
to
submit
their
application.
A
A
Meeting
meeting
a
14-day
timeline
and
having
sufficient
time
to
review
and
and
all
of
that,
I
think
the
definitions
still
require
a
lot
of
work.
There's
already
been
a
lot
of
work
done
into
it,
but
as
if,
if
you
look
at
my
comments,
you'll
see
there
are
a
lot
of.
There
are
a
lot
of
items
that
do
not
appear
in
the
definitions
that
do
appear
in
the
land
use
table
and
so.
A
With
revisions
to
the
land
use
table,
but
there
are
a
lot
of
them
in
there
and
there
are
a
few,
not
so
many,
but
there
are
some
definitions
that
are
in
the
definitions
that
aren't
in
the
land
use
table.
So
it
goes
both
ways,
but
the.
A
A
For
grammar
and
just
clarity
as
you
go
through
the
document,
so
maybe
maybe
what
you
sent
out
dennis
didn't
have
all
of
all
of
those.
Those
changes
and
comments
addressed
that
that
would
explain
things
a
little
bit
better
because.
C
A
So
now
I
I've
looked,
and
I
don't
see
that
we
have
any
specific
timeline
here
for
for
approval.
From
from
the
board
standpoint,
can
you
can
you
verify
that?
I
think
the
ordinance
only
says
our
timeline
is
dictated
by
you
know
state
laws
or
whatever
it's
very
general,
and
I'm
not
sure
what
those
constraints
are.
A
How
much
time
do
we
have
with
this,
because
I
think
I
think
I
think
we
need
to
do
some
more
work
on
it
before
we
send
it
up
to
council,
but
we'll
we'll
get
the
opinion
on
the
board
on
that,
but
we
so
so
that's
the
first
question:
do
you
have
any
idea
what
how
much
time
do
we
have
before?
We
need
to
render
a
decision.
B
A
Okay,
are
there
any?
Are
there
any
thoughts
from
the
rest
of
the
board
members
on,
so
we
have
three
options
for
for
tonight.
We
can
approve
it
as
is,
and
then
work
on
those
amendments
further
and
then
and
then
do
another
revision
or
another.
I
think
amendment
with
another
public
hearing
to
approve
those
I
mean
we
can
do
that.
A
A
You
know
another
public
hearing
when
we're
when
we're
ready,
when
we
we're
all
comfortable
that
it's
in
the
final
state
or
we
can
just
table
it
and
keep
the
public
hearing
open,
like
we've
talked
about
before
and
keep
the
period
for
public
comment
open
and
then
continue
working
until
until
it's
ready
is.
C
C
A
Okay,
it's
been
moved
by
drew
seconded
by
frank
that
we
that
we
table
this
discussion.
Keep
the
public
hearing
open,
give
us
a
chance
to
incorporate
some
more
of
these.
These
comments
and
get
comfortable
with
it
more
comfortable
with
it
and
I'll
repeat
again,
you've
done
an
excellent
job
on
this.
This
is
this
is
a
a
huge
undertaking
and
and
really
really
a
good
job.
A
C
D
A
Eric
yes,
andrew,
yes,
okay,
the
motion
carries
to
table
it.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
dennis
and
board
members
good
discussion,
and
so,
let's
over
the
next,
you
know
a
few
weeks
at
least
let's
take
another
look
at
this,
and
dennis
will
will
be
able
to
do
some
more
working
incorporating
some
of
these
things.
A
We'll
take
another
run
at
it,
and
you
know
I
don't
know
that
whether
we'll
be
ready
next
next
month's
meeting,
but
maybe
the
month
after
as
a
target.
A
In
any
case,
I
I
personally
would
like
to
open.
I
I
would
like
to
hold
the
public
mirror
the
public
hearings.
You
know.
C
A
A
big
deal,
especially
when
we
get
on
our
processes
and
for
as.
A
F
Correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong
mr
chair,
but
have
we
heard
anything
from
the
public
email
any
anything
at
all
as
to
what
we're
doing
with
chapter
13
and
the
updates
and
everything
have
we
heard
anything
at
all
up
until
this
point
from
the
public.
G
F
F
Does
that
mean
people
just
don't
care
that
you
know
it?
It's
very
important
that
the
public
plays
a
part
in
this
if,
if
they'd
like
to
just
doesn't
seem
there's
a
whole
lot
of
input
at.
G
D
G
Them
it's
kind
of
abstract
to
see
how
changes
to
the
entire
ordinance
is
going
to
impact
me
directly.
A
A
That
concludes
item
four.
Unless
there
are
more
comments,
sorry,
just.
D
Thank
you.
I
do
think
I
do
think
dan
that
it's
good
to
have
a
time
goal
for
maybe
a
couple
months
to
get
that
submitted
to
the
city
council.
I
think
that
you
should
kind
of
have
that
seriously
as
a
goal,
because
it
has
been
yeah
a
while
that
this
has
been
in
the
process,
and
I
think
dennis
has
has
a
good
form
that
we
can
that
we
can
submit
very
soon
so.
A
Yeah,
I
think
we're
almost
there.
So
thank
you
for
that.
What
what
do
the
board
members
think
about
scheduling
a
working
session
to
maybe
knock
this
out
or
maybe
more
than.
B
B
A
And
and
that's
that
that's
an
important
import,
because
you
know
a
lot
of
the
stuff
that
I
put
in
there,
you
may
disagree
with
for
whatever
reason
and
that's
perfectly
fine,
but
just
to
go
through
and
address
just
just,
but
we
know
that
you
know:
there's
there's
a
reason
why
it's
in
or
out
right.
That
would
be
really
good
thanks
dennis!
That's
that's
good
and
and
that'll
give
us
a
chance
by
next
meeting.
Maybe
we
can
even
do
it
next
meeting
if
we
all
buckle
down.
G
A
G
A
So
that's!
That's!
That's!
Next
on
our
agenda!
So
if
we're,
if,
if
we're
complete
with
agenda
item
four
we'll
move
on
to
agenda
item
five,
any
last
words
on
number
four,
all
right,
thanks
everyone!
So
let's
move
on
to
number
five
new
business
discussion
on
revisions
to
section
13-700,
home
occupations.
A
A
This
turn
this
over
to,
I
guess
dennis,
do
you
did
you
want
to
talk
us
through
this.
B
Like
you
say,
it's
been
in
your
packet
during
the
last
meeting,
it's
in
your
packet
tonight.
I
know
that
there's
been
comments
submitted
again
by
you,
mr
chair,
to
look
at
some
of
the
details
of
this.
A
Yeah,
what
well
sure
what
one,
maybe
not
every
one
of
them,
almost
try
to
pick
the
highlights
here
and
open
it
up
for
all
the
members
to
to
comment.
B
B
So
in
your
packets,
I'm
looking
at
the
the
language
that
you've
got
here
been
proposed
to
strike
or
well.
As
far
you
know,
the
first
section
is
is
what
we're
looking
at
is
the
conditional
uses
currently
in
the
in
the
development
standards.
You
have
the
ability
of
the
code
enforcement
officers
to
approve
something
administratively
or
for
something
to
come
to
the
planning
board
and
be
approved
based
on
the
standards
and,
of
course,
there's
a
list
of
all
the
standards
that
something
has
to
comply
with
by
incorporating
kind
of
an
in-between
phase.
B
All
of
the
other
city
standards
that
we
have
don't
necessarily
apply,
or
some
of
them
may
apply
differently-
that
by
looking
at
it
from
a
conditional
use
standpoint,
the
planning
board
can
say
we
think.
As
long
as
these
criteria
are
met,
we
still
have
to
meet
these
city
standards,
but
these
additional
standards
may
need
to
apply
to
your
project
because
of
the
impacts
that
you're
creating.
B
That
was
the
intent
of
this
creation
of
a
conditional
use
category
of
use,
and
then
this
would
tie
in
with
the
land
use
table
which
has
been
drafted
such
that
it
now
has
permitted
uses,
which
somebody
can
do
by
right.
There
would
be
uses
that
are
just
not
permitted
and
then
conditional
uses
would
be
those
types
of
uses
that
the
planning
board
has
to
review,
and
these
are
general
categories
or
general
criteria
by
which
those
maybe
unique
situations
could
be
considered
in
zones
in
different
zones,
and
so.
A
B
Yes
and
well,
in
fact,
the
land
use
table
is
in
the
intent.
Usually
behind
the
land
use
table
is
to
identify
primary
uses
of
property.
B
B
You
run
into
the
situation.
We
did
out
there
on
the
van
buren
road
and
then
the
intent
really
is
to
say
if
your
the
land
use
table
is
a
primary
use
table.
If
that
was
all
by
itself,
that's
that's
what
it
is,
but
if
you're
going
to
do
something
as
a
home
occupation,
we're
going
to
dive
into
the
home
occupation
regulations
and
look
at
specific
impacts
that
might
be
created
with
that
use.
B
A
So
some
of
some
of
the
things
up
front
that
I've
looked
at
are
you
know,
like
some
of
the
deletions
and
make
a
comment
difficult
or
impossible
to
assess
you
know
does
not
adversely
affect
the
value.
I
don't
the
value
of
adjacent
properties.
I
mean.
A
Okay,
just
trying
to
hit
the
high
points
here.
A
And
accessory
are
seemingly
used
interchangeably,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
there's
a
distinction
there,
I'm
recommending
that
we
use
a
you
know:
standard
terminology.
B
A
A
couple
in
a
couple
places
you
talk
about
community
development
offices
and
I
think
that
ties
back
to
your
you
know
2b
architecture,
you
know
for
our
process,
I
think
do
we
want
to
stick
with
the
terms
of
the
ceo
for
this
revision
or
you
are
or
do
you
intend
to
roll
all
of
the
community
development
office
approach
into
this
change?.
B
Organizationally,
we
don't
quite
know,
what's
going
to
happen
overall
in
the
future,
with
with
the
department
right,
we're
always
a
code
enforcement
officer,
but
the
department
as
a
whole
may
include
more
than
just
the
code
enforcement
officer
and
the
ability
to
have
multiple
people
taking
it
or
have
an
eye
on
it.
But
generally
the
code
enforcement
officer
would
be
the
one
interpreting
and
reviewing
these
requests.
G
A
Then
that
wording
needs
to
be
changed
to
ceo,
because
that's
what
we
have
now
consistency
awarding
employees.
Well,
you
can,
you
can
read
through
those,
so
I
don't
want
to
monopolize
here
on
this
discussion.
Other
other
other
other
comments
from
the
board
members
on
what
what
dennis
has
done
so
far
on
this
draft.
A
C
D
Or
is
it
going
to
be
something
different,
so
yeah.
A
So
you'll
recall
during
our
last
meeting
we
updated
the
home
occupation,
form
request
form
so,
but
we
did
that
with
knowledge.
I
will
probably
have
to
go
in
and
revise
it
again.
Once.
E
G
So
so,
in
light
of
our
new
reality,
I'm
thinking
that
this
home
occupation
standard
is
going
to
get
a
workout.
We
seem
to
have
interest
in
more
people
working
from
their
homes.
G
A
lot
of
people
are
working
from
their
homes
and
we'll
never
know
about
it.
Basically,
they're
they're
on
the
internet
doing
what
they
need
to
do
and
that's
fine.
They
don't
have
people
coming
in
driving
into
their
driveway
or
anything
like
that
right,
but
I
suspect
this
will
be.
This
will
be
a
trending
thing.
F
B
A
H
B
E
B
A
Are
there
any
thoughts
from
the
board
members
on
on
that
aspect
of
it?
Whether
we
should
allow
allow
an
outside
employees
in
the
home,
home-based
businesses.
F
E
F
A
C
A
G
B
B
If
there's,
if
those
standards
can't
be
met
but
based
on
the
circumstances
of
your
home,
where
you
live,
we
might
be
able
to
flex
those
standards.
Then
you
require
a
conditional
use.
Permit
and
you'd
be
able
to
come
in
and
say:
look
I
live
in
the
r3
zone.
I've
got
10
acres,
I've
got
a
need
for
six
employees
and
they
can
all
park
off
street
safely
and
not
even
be
visible
from
the
street
so
as
to
hide
the
appearance
of
my
business
and
can
I
get
a
conditional
use
permit
to
operate.
B
That's
that's
some
flexibility
that
we
can
build
into
this
home
occupation
ordinance.
If
we
want
to
right
now,
we
just
simply
right
now
it
says
to
as
a
bare
minimum.
You
can
only
have
one
employee
there
on
your
site:
that's
not
a
resident,
but
we
could
say
with
a
conditional
use
permit.
You
can
have
more
employees
right
now-
it's
not
written
in
here,
but
we
could
add
that,
depending
on
the
circumstances
you
could
have
more
employees
or
you
could.
We
can
permit
additional
traffic
impact
in
the
neighborhood,
depending
on
the
conditional
use.
D
D
That's
I
wouldn't
want
to
see.
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
in
an
r2
a
place.
You
know
if
it
was
an
acre
and
other
houses
around
see
a
six
employee
operation
coming
in
with
all
of
that,
all
of
that
traffic
type
of
thing
when
it
and
then
ending
up
doing
a
use
with
the
conditional
permit.
That
should
actually
be
a
regular
land
use
that
isn't
allowed
in
that
zone.
A
And
if
we
are
going
to
expand
it
or
provide
the
opportunity
to
expand
it,
as
I
stated
before,
I
think
it's
important
that
we
have.
You
know
some
firm
criteria
for
what's
going
to
be
allowed
and
what's
not,
you
know
in
terms
of
the
numbers
and
we
apply
those
consistently
across
the
board.
Otherwise
we're
going
to
get
in
trouble.
B
I
think,
with
regards
to
employees,
you
could
say
with
a
conditional
use
permit
you
could
have
up
to.
You
know,
set
a
ceiling
three
four
employees,
but
the
only
way
you're
going
to
get
those
employees
is,
and
then
you
spell
out
in
the
ordinance
you're
in
the
r3
zone,
you
have
to
hide
the
parking
areas.
B
A
Well,
given,
given
that
this
is
certainly
a
trend
that
that's
likely
to
to
continue
so
other
other
model
home
occupation,
ordinances
that
we
can
refer
to,
as
you
know,
just
you
know
see
what
other
other
municipalities
are
doing,
how
they're
dealing
with
it.
B
G
A
They
might
be
useful,
but
I
like
I
personally,
I
mean
I
like
the
direction
you're
taking
this
dennis.
I
think
this
is
the
right
way
to
go,
just
as
we
can
just
work
out
the
details,
always
always
in
the
details.
E
I
like
the
idea
that
mr
markers
talked
about
having
the
flexibility
as
long
as
they
meet
other
requirements
that
wouldn't
be
a
problem
to
their
neighbors.
F
You
know
such
as
employees
carpooling
if
they
had
to
carpool
to
to
a
residence
to
all
work
together
or
some
something
of
that
sort,
so
that
there's
not
six
cars
hanging
out
there
or
they're,
not
feeding
traffic
or
not
beating
an
emergency
vehicle
passing
through
or
anything
like
that.
A
To
schedule
a
public
hearing,
we
haven't
been
doing
that
in
practice.
That's
something
that
we
should
probably
consider
and
discuss
whether
we
want
to,
but
for
now,
let's
just
open
it
up
for
comments,
you
everybody
think
we're
ready
for
a
public
hearing
next
time.
A
A
Okay,
any
any
last
comments
on
item
5,
a
revisions
to
section
13-700,
home
occupations.
B
One
of
the
things
that
I
found
is,
for
instance,
in
the
you
would
expect
that
you
would
have
a
section
that
talks
about
this
is
the
review
processes
that
you
have
to
go
through
versus
these
are
the
standards
you
have
to
meet
and
what
I'm
finding
is
the
section
that
talks
about
the
review
processes
has
a
bunch
of
standards
intermingled
in
it
that
really
need
to
be
over
in
these
other
sections,
and
some
of
them
aren't
consistent
between
that.
And
so
that's.
C
A
G
Sure
sure
I'll
give
you
the
highlights.
Basically,
the
weather's
turned
nice
and
people
are
starting
to
poke
their
heads
out
of
hibernation
and
get
busy.
I
want
to
touch
on
earthquake
on
our
work
on
the
land
bank
legislation.
I
think
that
we're
kind
of
dry
hung
here
we're
still
at
having
our
lr,
not
an
ld.
G
Our
language
is
stuck
in
the
buyers
office
with
1800
lds
ahead
of
it.
So
it's
likely
that
it
won't
get
read
this
year.
How
many
1800
lds
everybody?
I
think
that's
what
you.
G
So
that
being
said
locally,
we
have
attorney
solomon,
looking
at
some
language
that
we
can
use
locally.
There
is
some
interest
in
local
nonprofit
economic
development
entities
that
maybe
they
would
like
to
do
this
type
of
activity.
So
that's
all
a
good
thing.
A
Are
we
allowed
to
have
our
own?
I
guess
land
bank
ordinance
without
top
cover
from
the
state.
G
So,
what's
been
done
in
other
places,
for
instance,
sanford
is
the
one
I've
been
using
as
a
model.
They
created
a
land
bank,
but
it's
more,
I
think
they
used
housing
authority.
G
Basically,
you
need
a
non-profit
that
can
accept
property,
sell
property,
hold
property,
develop
property,
okay,
and
we
have
some
of
those
entities
here
in
town.
B
The
city
will
get
all
of
its
past
due
taxes
out
of
the
deal
and
then
some
and
then
the
nonprofit
can
utilize
any
proceeds
from
their
development
to
move
forward
with
their
indicated
goals
that
are
allowed
under
irs
codes
or
under
their
non-profit
situation.
A
And
honestly,
I
think
that's
a
really
good
approach,
because
the
whole
concept
of
landbag
it's
very
charged-
and
I
know
you
know
from
myself
my
own
opinion
of
it-
is
there's
a
lot
of
negatives
that
I
don't
like
about
what
some
other
people
are
doing.
So
this
is
a
good
foot
in
the
door
and
gives
us
a
you
know
framework
to
build
a
build
on
you
know,
so
maybe
that's
the
best
way
to
do
it
now.
Wait
for
the
state
just
put
something
in
put
something
in
place
ourselves.
G
I
do
believe
it'll
happen
at
the
state
level.
I
think
it's
happening
in
new
hampshire
and
vermont
in
real
time
as
we
speak,
so
I
think
it's
a
coming
thing,
but
yeah.
We
shouldn't
wait
around
for
that,
so
anytime
that
I
can
pour
into
it
I'm
doing
the
arduous
task
of
land
use
survey.
G
Mapping
hopefully
have
a
sneak
peek
at
that
then,
at
the
next
meeting
it's
been
long
and,
as
I
said,
kind
of
arduous,
but
we're
slugging
our
way
through
we're
arranging
for
a
demolition
of
827
main
street,
which
is
the
old,
mattress
and
furniture
store
across
from
the
airport.
G
That
building
has
the
center
part
of
that
building
has
collapsed.
The
roof
has
collapsed,
it's
been
deemed
a
dangerous
building.
G
We
have
our
rfps
back
our
quotes
back
for
asbestos
inspection.
I
think
we
may
be
able
to
act
on
that
tomorrow
and
our
rfps
for
the
actual
demolition
will
should
start
coming
in
tomorrow
as
well,
and
hopefully
we'll
have
one
less
dangerous
building
in
the
city.
G
G
A
stream
stream
smart
road
crossing
workshop
just
the
other
day,
with
thoughts
of
of
potential
work
at
waterbrook,
that
that
will
actually
be
a
state
project.
Initially,
at
the
where
the
railroad
base
is
washed
out
some
culverts
there.
I
think
the
state
is
going
to
just
close
that
out
and
open
it
up.
There'll,
be
no
new,
culvert
or
bridging.
Put
in
they'll,
probably
restore
the
the
stream,
but
that
leaves
us
with
with
our
bridge
on
limestone
street,
which
is
a
huge,
concrete
box.
G
Two
box
type
culvert,
which
is
aging
and
showing
some
stress
so
we'll
be
thinking
about
that
in
the
future.
I
was
also
hoping
to
maybe
get
some
pointers
about
caribou
stream,
where
it's
an
impaired
stream.
G
G
For
a
watershed?
I
didn't
get
a
lot
of
help.
G
Continued
cleanup
of
former
bird's
eye
processing
facility,
I
think
dennis-
has
done
the
the
yeoman's
task
of
getting
the
the
epa
phase.
Two,
no,
no
okay.
This
is
bird's
eye.
Excuse
me,
the
final
cleanup
of
the
pcb
hot
site,
we're
working
with
haley
ward,
formerly
ces
engineering.
We've
got
a
cleanup
strategy.
Basically,
we'll
have
to
dig
out
that
area
send
the
special
ways
to
try
community
landfill.
G
So
that's
underway.
I
mentioned
the
the
phase
two
that
would
be
at
lower
linden
at
the
power
plant
trying
to
get
some
money
to
do
a
phase
two
study.
We
have
some
interest
in
in
in
the
building,
maybe
not
the
building
itself,
but
maybe
just
the
scrap
so
so
we're
doing
our
due
diligence
to
hopefully
bring
him
out
of
a
proposed
project
soon,
hopefully
soon
riverfront
development
committee
we're
still
striving
to
become
an
official
committee
of
the
city.
G
G
Just
today
I
fielded
a
question
about
a
possible
subdivision
off
the
beard
road
back
to
back
with.
What
is,
I
guess
would
be.
The
delwood
trailer
part
would
be
three
large
lots
made
out
of
a
very
large
lot
right
now,
so
that
should
be
interesting.
We
haven't
tackled
the
subdivision.
Yet
right
and,
as
I
said
I
had
interested
just
today
in
in
you
know
home
occupation,
so
that
and
a
lot
of
snow's
gone.
G
A
That's
all
I
had
good.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
do
we
do
we
anticipate
any?
Besides
what
we've
already
talked
about
the
public
hearing
for
the
home
occupation?
Do
we
anticipate
any
applications
to
come
in
for
public
hearing
for
next
time,
so.
G
That
one
application
may
be
the
home
occupation,
the
home
occupation.
The
developer's
got
the
subdivision
application
in
hand
that
one
will
be
a
lengthier
process
with
at
least
three
meetings
of
the
planning
board
yeah,
but
they
should
sit
down
and
meet
with
staff
first
as
well.
So
again
I
can't
we
haven't
done
one
yet.
So
I
really
I
don't
know
what
the
timeline
is
going
to
look
like
if
it's
even
possible
to
get
something
in
front
of
us
from
may.
A
A
Question
so
in
our
last
meeting
we
approved
of
rezoning,
you
know,
remember
the
our
r1
to
r3
and
I
was
confused
by
the
package
I
was
sent
up
to
council.
I
sent
an
email
to
the
group
here
assembled
and
just
asking
for
clarification.
What
is
going
on
at
council
level
for
what's
being
actually
requested.
A
That
that's
great-
and
I
appreciate
that
so
so-
a
couple
items
I
think,
with
that
intent
in
mind
a
couple
items
are
missing.
A
So
the
original
letter
from
the
planning
board
describing
our
approval
that
was
actually
submitted
and
reviewed
during
the
last
council
meeting,
but
that
should
be
part
of
the
public
hearing
package
for
the
20th,
because
that
that
contains
some
context
for
for
the
the
request
and
the
planning
board's
position
and-
and
what
also
should
be
included,
are
the
meeting
minutes
in
the
public
hearing
package,
because,
if
you're,
if
your
intent
is
to
provide
the
greater
context,
those
items
need
to
be
need
to
be
included.
A
Because,
honestly,
we
made
the
decision
to
to
reject
the
smaller
laws
because
they
were
non-conforming
and
we
did
not
want
to
increase.
You
know
the
the
level
of
non-conform
or
create
non-conforming
laws.
Out
of
that,
that
was
our
main
rationale
right,
and
so
you
know,
if
it's
a
public
hearing,
the
public
ought
to
be
aware
of
that
rationale,
not
just
the
council,
but
but
the
public.
B
A
Yeah-
and
I
figured
it
was
you
know
something
along
those
lines
and
and
and
that's
fine,
our
role
was
to
review
and
make
a
recommendation.
It
doesn't
mean
the
council
is
going
to
adopt
it
or
whatever
I
just.
As
I
said
in
my
my
email,
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
weren't
appearing
to
be
working
at
cross
purposes.
A
A
A
A
Drew's
smiling,
what
did
you
have?
Did
you
have
a
look.
F
F
Okay,
I've
got
a
pregnant
wife,
so
I've
learned
to
just
kind
of
go
along
here,
one
on
the
tail
end,
so
I'm
going
along
with
everything
and
I'm
kind
of
carrying
it
over
into
this
decision
right
now,
so
whatever
the
planning
board
wants
to
do,
it's
entirely
up
to
you
guys
any
any
anything
you
guys
want
to
do.
That's
fine.
A
A
A
A
C
A
All
right,
well,
let's
plan
for
that.
If
something
happens
between
now
and
then
we
get
uncomfortable
about
that,
just
speak
out
and
we
can
continue
with
zoom
if
we
have
to.
F
As
far
as
the
public
hearings
go
with,
that
admitted
to
the
admittance
of
the
public
and
everything
like
that,
how's
all
that
gonna
work.
A
B
A
B
G
A
Yeah,
if
there's
a
really
really
I'll
say
it
again,
if
there's
any
concern
or
something
happens
between
now
and
then
you
change
your
mind
and
get
uncomfortable
just
you
know,
let
me
know
because
I'm
easy
too,
I
think
it
works
better
in
person
and
I
miss
you
guys.
You
know
I'd
like
to
be
in
the
room
with
you
and
I
think
it
works
better
for
public
hearings.
I
think
the
barriers
for,
like
I
said
earlier,
for
people
to
come
in
via
zoom
who's,
going
to
bother
doing
that.
You
know
so
anyway.
Okay,
what's
that.
A
Thanks,
okay,
last
round
any
any
other
further
comments,
questions
anything
anybody
would
like
to
discuss
before
we
adjourn.
B
I
want
to
also
quickly
highlight
the
the
ogre
and
road
dump
solar
project
that
oh
yeah,
you
looked
at,
so
just
so
that
you
have
the
information.
We've
been
going
back
and
forth
on
the
lease
agreements
and
it's
been
reviewed
by
our
attorneys,
their
attorneys
back
and
forth,
and
then
we
thought
we
were
ready
for
the
council
to
go
ahead
and
approve
it.
B
C
B
B
A
That's
too
bad,
oh,
a
quick
revisit
on
the
riverfront
develop
redevelopment,
so
is
our
establishment
of
our
official
committee?
Is
that
meeting
the
council
this
time
on
the
20th.
B
We
can
present
that
to
the
council,
for
them
just
to
say,
there's
really
no
action
that
the
council
needs
to
take
on
that
as
far
as
recognition
of
the
of
the
committee,
unless
there's
some
official
bylaws
that
the
committee
wants
to
adopt
it's
more
just
a.
This
is
an
initiative
that
the
the
citizens
and
the
staff
are
working
on
and,
as
the
council
acknowledged
that-
and
maybe
that's
all
that
you're
really
looking
for.
G
B
C
E
A
Amanda
yeah
christine.