so terry i mean actually at the bottom of page to page three the motion by joy in the second by tad is that because we basically move to table the discussion right we did at the end of the number eight it talks about the motion  who didn't get a second actually on the the motion so the motion really wasn't play so we had a discussion where the motion table which oh oh well it says here there's a motion and a second so right but i just wondered why so there's no note on what we did as a result so that we had the discussion and then we had ok so that's how that i wasn't at this is the first time maybe i've seen that documented this way so ok all right i stand so yeah i had read the rest of it i just didn't understand the way it was was written out so ok so we have a motion that isn't table yeah ok so there was basically no vote there was no law because usually when you make a motion don't you in second it don't you have a vote as a result of the order except in the case of this because the motion to table takes precedence over the original both tonight ask you to introduce yourselves give us a little brief outline of your history and town and events in town and why you'd like to be on the conservation commission you know start with  for operations and so oversee all their programs and new business activities i guess i want to give back that's why i'm here i've worked my entire career advising national governments you know it's about governments communities on how to do governments work and relate it to environmental issues and i would like to teacher though the last five years i worked for the state's employee assistance program working on work site wellness programs and in the nothing mental health field myself i'm not a mental health practitioner i do a lot of the business management for organization but to that and i certainly see in the importance of people being out in green space and enjoying time outside and what that does for our health and well being for the past five years i've served on the board of directors for their center for health and learning which has a strong focus on health education for our students and also more recently a specific task of working on suicide prevention in the state and i've really enjoyed that i've taken on a number of leadership roles on that board as i've said i've done it for five years and at this point i'm very interested in getting and spending my time that i allocate for volunteering in service on something more geared toward something very local in my town i'm very interested in local government and when i saw this  the perfect opportunity to pursue that my husband and i have a dog and an eighteen month old daughter and we are certainly we benefited greatly from the trail system in wilson and spent a lot of time outside when we decided to move here four years ago willesden was just the perfect balance for us of being close to work close to commerce but having a lot of green space to enjoy and that was very important to us know i'm also put an application in for the planning commission i put on my i gave you my writing for that for this position too is one thing i wanted to dress in that one and that is my statement of the between developing and hand conservation because i feel that all in a position on a conservation really is more of an advocate for conservation for conservation so on as everybody here and i'm sure your next ones from next week the next session i want to give back to the community to i think that's important  as my role on the on the committee is really technical as well as the ability to bring stakeholders together and to understand different stakeholders when i talk with stakeholders here i'm talking about government private sector citizens community groups or whatever they might be on an oaf worked very close to the point on many projects with multiple state career so i  think they have that skill and growing family you know for your what willesden resident but lifelong vermonter i think would be a nice contribution to the board just my perspective of creating you know family and getting out and using  the trails in the space also my background in human services and accessibility for people with their disabilities i think certainly would be of a value to the board or the commission rather and you know my general interesting commitment i think a lot of times you know scholars benefit from someone who's dedicated interested in being there and committed to learning about the challenges that are explanation to that question would be if we had a chance to read the town plan how the town plan outlined some of the goals have you had a chance to talk with the environmental planner or attend a meeting just help me you know explain a little bit if you could i have been engaged much with the town i have gone through the lot of good things going on i see that you do for the commission deals with a lot of the building sites and things like that and it seems like you're hitting the right targets and looking waste water  also i notice you know that will stand for a long time now has been trying to allow for development for business and residents kind of been targeted areas and limit development in other parts and just try to really focus on having somewhat of a downtown area and build out from there i also had reviewed in just learning about the opening on the conservation committee reviews the last number of years of notes and the trials and tribulations of acquiring the catamount center which i too am very curious about on this virus you know the  sensitivities around endangered animals and species in the western but also really to expand on the trail network and to preserve that large lot of land that would otherwise mean we may need to be developed to meet that family it's kind of financial obligations from what i understand it was interesting to me i did get to have a nice long her station with melinda when i expressed my interest to scott i don't recall her exact how about the town conservationist or environmentalist and you know i had mentioned that as of a voter that may represent many of our residents that don't necessarily get to review all of the select or plans of the town plans and you know you're presented as a voter with these questions on you know if you want to vote yes or no and i said to melinda i you know won't be surprised if you get a no go on the when you see conservation issue because of the way that it's phrased and so she had kind of said yeah they were aware you know even though this commission has had recommended to continue on the way the language was phrased i thought i said if i were an educated not even reading these notes i think i might have naturally just said no because that's almost  recommendation it was the way it was worded and she said you know we're working with the observer and some of the local media outlets to just parrot try to provide more information about this commission's recommendations and why why we're going about that so again i think that just speaks to my where i sit on the board as feeling like i represent a significant portion of all of the ins residents and young families and not always having the time or the will ability to read through and really get all up to speed on issues and how we could put out information in a way that is easily accessible to to my second question is the high for some reason this falls on my shoulders come on people who interview for a position get asked this it's a conflict of interest question and there may be a very small to no chance they'll be a conflict of interest but i think it's still important so the question is is how do you recognize a conflict of interest and what would you do about it i don't know who should ensure that  but i think it's still important to make sure that it's known if you do have an interest and therefore i would definitely express that i think that conflict of interest for me is  and volunteering on a committee that may make decisions related to development plans or not or even plans or not you know if you in this case myself or any individual would gain to benefit from the decisions of the voted on would gain financially relationship wise or otherwise you very directly or indirectly  we in human services you work with conflict of interest all the time so you know just being genuine with your interest to do the what's right for the municipality and not one's own self interest and to just to be honest and to name that when it is an issue i pretty much agree with what's been said we deal with conflict of interest interest quite often in the work that i'm in and i think as long as you're transparent and honest and can bring issues forward  this floor will likely will take place at the closing on paper as things are exchanged but just to get a visual kind of how this is the mechanics of it so we think we've got two parcels mccullough's lamp three hundred seventy six acres in the pages land seventeen acres the trustor public land is going to acquire those properties create a new parcel of three hundred ninety three acre town forests at that point they're also they're going to put put a conservation easement on that new town force parcel and then transfer the here from there or down from the trust for public land the town will acquire what they call restricted feet ownership and to acquire at the town has to fall some certain conditions of sale and that will kind of pull on the second page here as is going to be acquired from the trusts are public land at this point so what the financial piece is going to look like the money flow and the conditions set forth one of the major condition is the conservation easement  which is being which is going to be held by the man trust and the housing conservation board the town needs to agree to those restrictive covenants put in place on this easement and this is something the board i believe last last fall some point of the first draft so pieces of the conservation easement are the forest management plan which the catamount committees been working on over the past several months and will be taken to the board for review this spring and then that's required condition of the conservation  management plan the license agreement we're discussing some more tonight is ancillary to it it's an appendix management plan it's a component of how the lands can be managed how the uses are going to take place so that's why i've kind of got the town forest parcel we've got the because by the end of june if we can work out a couple issues and close up our fund raising but we're not we don't know whether we can make that it might be doing vicious but that's what we're shooting for like us to close by the end of this calendar year so that is a deadline with one of the funding sources  first would work better for us but we can make it work before problem money's available break the breakdown of the earth do we think we're going to have to spend the money or do we have grants to cover you're talking about the two hundred so this project is kind of right in the middle of two grounds so one thing that you're allowed to do is request a waiver of retroactivity from the national park service which says you can close and then apply for the grant after closing after the town takes ownership of the property and then you would basically be refunded that extra two hundred thousand assuming we get the grant just  work with you i do apply for the grant in february two thousand one thousand i served on the committee for the state that judged last year's grants and i'm very familiar with kind of what type of projects they are looking for this is pretty much spot on for their goals and states ordinator of that grant program also thinks that it's very appropriate request they're going to have about six hundred eight hundred thousand available in the potentially we could get that back after the fact and that's my request that we're the town to put in six hundred hours of the closing with the event and of getting two hundred still two hundred or were two hundred thousand dollars sure yes and we have a great fundraising committee that is working with us and we're in the quiet face of the fund raising right now and reaching out to some larger donors  when we move to the public phase of the fund raising and that's when you will all of them the general public will hear a lot more about it will be reaching out to all previous cabinet or family center members to all members of richmond trails to members think we can get that two hundred between now and and  percent or not included no seventy nine is what we have totally secured ok that does not include the extra two hundred that we just took spoke about ok so that's a very good sign then as as i read us looking for confirmation on that do you mind me asking a couple questions about the expenses i'm not challenging i just would prefer to understand sir on the second one is staffing and i'm just curious which entity is that staffing me for that's just a public plan so that's all my time our turn is time ok and and then down below in direct what would be some of the indirect type cost because it is it's a little bit higher than i had anticipated it might be so sure so the way our organization does it as which is similar to a lot of other non profits is we put fifteen percent on all private gifts that come in towards a project and that goes in direct for the kind of organization as a whole to keep the lights on and and programming and and staff that aren't directly associated with a project budget ok so that's fifteen percent of the that's fifteen percent of the private gifts that come in conditions with any mutually agreed to amendments for successive ten year terms and crossed out which shall be renewed at the option of licensee provided that the licensee is operating the property consistently with the terms of this agreement and the town consents to such renewal and then crossed out the part that said which consensual but not b and recently withheld and then and then the last sentence i crossed out there after i just wrote the parties agree to work in good faith to negotiate for their licenses and any on questions about reversions not you whatever you about the next if you'll go to page eight so there is a question about the insurance and we just under section thirteen just simply stated licensee shall maintain general liability insurance reasonably acceptable to town and make shall make the town additional insured loss pay and such policies and then crossed out all the stuff about altering or terminating coverage and then the amount and types of coverage will be reviewed by licensee in the town on an annual basis as part of the annual plan and then we added  fallon so i just simply took it back reinserted it into this agreement and said if you think that's that clauses or that section  and then before you or i'm sorry before we move off a page eight or maybe you're not done with this issue but i'd like to talk about the part that appears to be inserted by i guess the owners of kind of mt yeah and i back to the other parties to get their input and so the catamount or family center added a letter under letter e above that insurance section saying if after the date of this agreement there is an expansion of the use of the property due to adoption or region of the land management plan that creates the possibility of greater cost or life building on the part of the licensee in parentheses such as allowing horses or dogs on the property the town agrees to be responsible for any additional cost or liability so we had a conversation about this rick and i and eric and her and felt uncomfortable about that clause and and i think that  we're we're recommending that that be taken out because basically that is already covered under the section dealing with the management plan and maintaining and amendments to the management negotiation and we could simply add you know a clause under that section just saying i think now it says if it was any if it restricts the use of their uses in it or operations and that's the discussion we just had sterling i saw the general it doesn't feel like we're spending you know we're spending up front six hundred thousand dollars potentially town tax payer money and i feel like we have to know negotiate with another group in the town towns use the property and what i heard before was well it's the town's the select  decision which is really the residents right the residents away that's what board really should be the town in the residents deciding how to use property that they pay for with their dollars three we should have to negotiate with a third party it just feels like we're giving them too much say i mean if we want to use a particular group as a management group i think that's great i think we should have the ability to choose those who does that management and we as a town we should be setting down the guidelines as to how we want to use the property rights and we're going to give us some recommendations i think at some point and from those recommendations we decide you know how  or i think what you just said and correct me from wrong that we'd have to negotiate with the catamount family center if we wanted that to be a use of the property for people one say for people walking dogs and some part of the property is that when i heard it was well i mean i think that if you look under this there's that section just before  the section community force planning conservation easement so yeah we there is a negotiation to page four you're right that there property was you know for all of the values that they bring to the table and for all the things that i attended all those meetings i mean religiously i tended those my own certainly there was a lot of discussion about potentially using or wanting to use the catamount family center i don't i'm not using the correct term i'm sure for that for the group that does the nonprofit but there was really discussion of one of those meeting it will be it must be this is a condition of and this was just new news to me the first time you brought this up so it was actually actually a surprise so and then to have them in there for ten years of ten year terms so i don't know if that means something to me it sounds the cia no they took out some things but it sounds the same as some did before that they have the right to continuously manage this and the towns in a position purchased this property in you know with taxpayer money as as a representative of residence i don't feel comfortable with this but if you were team that's why there may be a different way of looking at this and that one section just does include the wording that the town would have to consent to such you know but the way i'm looking at is a little bit different and i understand that this commits to a specific group which i do i prefer not to have seen as part  but it is it is a requirement that the mechanics of set down but the way i look at it is they're providing a service of operating this facility with all the different  programs that they they offer from mountain biking running cross country running and cross country skiing and i think that the citizens in town want to see continued activities and programs and so rather than have the town hire a bunch of staff i think it kind of makes sense for us to contract that out in the future regardless of whether it's with this group or another and so whatever group we're going to contract out with we're going after negotiate the terms of whatever we want them to do and any of us and that's exactly the point where you get what they're asking is not unreasonable you may not like the fact that that's the group that's doing it but whoever you contract that you can just you know i don't i guess i don't think i don't i guess i don't as a business person myself and doing contracts on this basis for a lots of money usually you know the person you do the country with is the person that's doing providing a service for you at the terms that  sure and that's i think that's what i'm trying to get to so over the top so this is a valid point i get your point and it happened last time when i was i didn't realize that there was only one entity that we were for like a better or worse negotiating weather but that's the reality of the situation if we want can amount to be preserved we have that only that option of working with this one get me wrong but i don't believe that it is you know a whole nother thing to this we've asked for some things and you've come back and they've been accepted and they've been there so i also think they're trying to bargain in good faith and that there's something to be said that and we asked for some very specific things and i'm looking insane and i've got one comment if we get to page ten but so far they've done we have and we don't think i would agree with the town this when i don't like section e i would have that i would ask that that be taken but quick hopefully quick follow up question this this discussion about use to me it would be in a in an accurate if that discussion did not include there's going to be some restrictive covenants on this land that in themselves are going to restrict use of this land and those will be permanent restrictions on use ok i just want to live that those would be in for development and i think it could be like i had assumed motorcycle ok so the under section twenty three termination to tighten up the language on that and so what we did was just at the very end i guess i'll read the whole either party shall have the right to terminate this license at any time the other party fails to comply  that if the breaching party commences good faith effort security of legit not compliance and can't be cured within such thirty day period such non preaching party shall have and additional reasonable period of time that is mutually agreed upon by the parties to cure same fix it and then they and so i don't like the last sentence that was exactly what i didn't want in there so you guys fixed it with here with your with what you did and then when they edited it they put it right back in a different language i don't want the reasonable time period in there because that just leave that just leads to litigation quite frankly and i like your thirty days straight but that's what i would be strict that i just don't like that home literally means in the period sorry well i think when we were discussing this we did think of a situation what if it's the town that's the breaching party and what if we can't cure the breach within sixty days or whatever amount of time it is and and just like also yeah i mean we definitely struggled over how to revise this and what is reason what is a reasonable amount of time like what should it be another thirty days should it be three months and months you know one thing to consider here is weather and conditions that you don't if something is wrong with a particular trail or system in the middle of mud season you don't necessarily want them to go out i get that and i write that all the time and stuff and maybe there is some tighter language that you can think of that has actually got if you can't fix this until may one which happens to be forty five days after thirty days there's got to be a way we can word that specifically so it's not a mutually agreed done by may one because that's the next reasonable day that is a timeline and still the verse is sitting there going well may when does it really work let's talk about june when you get into this big discussion that goes on for too long i guess i'm just looking at work on this it's sort of a big process to work through the entire document but essentially what you have in front of you is there's a collection of what we consider to be minor changes some of them on our typographic some of them are simply swapping out the name of the newtown plan or earlier editions of the town plan things like that some other things that maybe a little bit larger than that changes of a few words that over time we felt were would help the document to read in a more clear fashion and then there are some things some also some things that we were requested to put in the buy a lot like for example  there's this height language having to do with the the f a a day with the approach to the airport and there are a few items which could be summarized under the words of beer barnes and chicken chickens which are a little bit larger in terms of what the impact on the byelaws is sound but that's what sense they would you have as is is within that collection of all of us things so we what we've provided for you is there's a memo which is very brief summary in addition to that there's the report that were acquired to prepare by statute and then we also prepared for you this kind of summary table which just shows you all of the various things that would change within that and then we also provided access to the entire document so whatever level of detail you want to drill down into the proposed changes it's all there show up in the buy a lot the discussion that ken summarized under beer has to do with the excess or e sales and excess free food and drink sales for food and drink manufacturers in industrially zone parts of town this is something that the board addressed a few years ago in a smaller way occasioned by the request of some of our local craft brewers to be able to have excess free food sales along with the sampling service that they provide at their breweries the ability to serve sixteen ounces of beer in one large plate glass as opposed to serving it as a sample flight is in part predicated upon the ability to also provide food and at the time a few years ago we did not have a provision that within that a beer brewer also have a essentially a major restaurant which would then grip grant them the ability to go for a license that would let them serve a pipe of beer so at the time the planning commission the select board work on some changes to the bylaws that did allow some excess free sales of that manner provided some fairly strict limits on the size and percentage of an operation that could be dedicated to that and also was a little bit unclear about what that was a percentage of so if you followed the observer the development review board recently was dealing with a proposal and the applicant was saying well your language has percentage of the building i'm one tenant in the building i'd still like the percentage of the building to dedicate to my excess resales and you know we said to the board we haven't administered it that way we've been more conservative with it what do you want to do in the derby said you know we think the plain language is quite limited here and that the avenue to change things is really to change the bylaws so that's what this was all in response to very briefly what this does is for a food or drink manufacturer in the industrial zoning district where we don't normally allow restaurants can dedicate thirty percent up to a absolute maximum of two thousand square feet of their operation to the successor a food and drink sales essentially a miniature restaurant they are also allowed regardless of size percentage relationship up to a five hundred square foot outdoor seating area this is somewhat similar to the proposal one of our craft  put in front of the development review board and was not able to obtain approval for under the existing this is a little bit less than what they were asking for but it's fairly close i should note that this bylaw set of collected amendments w transmitted to you under a five to two vote by the planning commission there was some disagreement about the changes that were being presented to you and that disagreement was about this particular provision so there were some concerns on the part of the dissenting members about having the outdoor service was that too much of an expansion was it too much of a restaurant and a little bit about the size as well and just how mixed industrial and commercial we really ought to  drinking in eating silty correct so that's a good sign as restaurant isn't it i mean it's a site i'm thinking two thousand square feet that's a pretty sizable area well we took a look at the footprints of some of the actual standalone restaurants in town the smallest thing that's close by footprint would be something like most it's pretty close to three thousand square feet and rely on your stand alone restaurants like chile longhorn or texas roadhouse are closer to four four and a half so we thought a little bit of that ok it was a very vigorous discussion about this with the planning commission  what what those caps might be and you may recall it was just a couple years ago we allowed the restaurant with the the food or beverage manufacturing for the first time and again it was in response to the emerging craft brewing industry and you know as part of that discussion you know a lot of the members of the planning commission talked about their own experiences and you know either you know with themselves their friends and family going to various you know craft bring to sell it is and what they saw as some of the elements that helped for a facility to be successful have to admit you know maybe i should recluse myself because  establishment i'm aware of in town that might be more and i guess i'm asking the question of i'm good i'm not sure what the liability the negative aspect of allowing this change to occur as both from its impact on that particular zoning district in the town and also the impact of the size you know let's just say that two thousand that's big enough maybe it should be more i'm just trying to understand what what the negative impacts could be and quite personally again maybe i'm biased here and maybe actually recluse myself but these seem to be you know if we're looking for a vibrancy aspect of a benefit to the town  bring additional vibrancy to town these seem to be my opinion working quite well one of them is to the point of getting frustrated i am because we go there and it's too crowded  so i guess i'm i'm trying to figure that i'm trying to figure this out if you don't mind her since yeah in fact some of the language that we work into the bylaws cites to a couple sections of the town plan and sort of presents this idea as in tension between them so there are things in the town plan about fiber to see and particularly about economic development flexibility of uses there are also things in the bylaws about or rather in the plan about really wanting to focus the most intense things and the things that are most likely to contribute to a design conscious pedestrian friendly town center in the growth center which is not where the industrial zoning district is that's the that would be the point right so when would allow restaurant don't the people in the restaurant area that i would think might be a little frustrated if you set up a place i don't know often dust that turns into two thousand square foot bar and restaurant takes business away from whoever it corners well they can't set up a competing location to cater to that right there so but i don't know if that's  i i kind of get that on the other hand we don't allow these microbreweries craft breweries to poppy located into the village section of town to try on the excitement there or or that or that are  there places where we want pedestrian traffic well right live and say so there's an issue and we say we realize you're here creating this vibrant you know type of atmosphere that people want to go to but we were not going to let you put it where we want th be does that make sense well no i guess because one you're talking about a manufacturing locations but you know want to put a factory in the middle of your taps corners shopping center area and guessing that area to be you know would be were things happen but it's kind of like on the other hand if so if it's happening somewhere else because the industry is creating this environment where it happens i guess i'm kind of wondering why not earth where all were all wrestling with the same the same difficult situation in fact last fall i was at a statewide planning conference and myself and p connors the plain director of south burlington and we're talking with this professor from out in ohio specialize in that what a career specializing in the studying of the production of craft beer it's a bed but we were talking about how this is you know we don't we're all struggling for what's a good way to deal with that and in fact what we have done here in our own office and what we've heard anecdotally the other people have done is when we've been searching the most for clarity in ministering things sometimes we've had to sort of make it up or sort of read between the lines to what what's implied in the regulations until we're able to get greater clarity so that we're all out here on the cutting edge on this stuff it is it is evolving and you know as as successful as the the brewers here will soon have been and some of the others you know in the region these are still relatively small entities i mean they're not they're they're not at the size of the end highs or bush so they're they're they're pretty small and they rely on the revenue stream that they generate from being able to sell directly to consumers and the that the excitement that they can generate from you know people who are able to go and they get to talk to the brewer and they get to take a picture send it back home up here i am up it are growing to be here which is really our second pass at it in you know in about two years and you know we thought we had a fairly good handle on a couple of years ago and but we had we had some understanding when we did the town plan and we were talking about economic development and one of the things that w talked about was that we needed to try to be open and flexible for not just thinking about sort of manufacturing in a traditional sort of way but there are these sort of new valving things like the craft  industry which is really you know kind of you know on steroids here in vermont we are one of the epicenters of this in the country and to try to be open and flexible and try to adapt to   terry one is you know sort of playing christian did have a really vigorous discussion about you know is it twenty percent is it thirty percent what's that percent and at thirty percent is that the right number you know time will tell but there was a big discussion about that as part of that and i think this goes to some of your questioning which is that you know how does that potentially impact other things whether it's it be existing restaurants in taft corners  the goals of our land use plan which is to try to concentrate that stuff in that half corners area as much as possible and then the other would be so even though this applies to  because of some of the oddities of our zoning now and i know i've mentioned this a few times to you we have areas with industrially zone property that are not that far away from residential areas so that represents i think a potential a potential down downside burlington beer for example you know the back side of burlington beer is you know the edge fitness center and it's not a residential neighborhood there but you don't have to go that far up the street and south brownell road and there is a residential area in there so that's that's certainly another another consideration that you know we want to try to  discussions with folks for example who they wanted to have they wanted to have a bakery and they wanted to sort of locate in under under this section of the by law and as we sort of tease that  discussion what we found out what they really wanted was they wanted to have you know a cafe where they sold you know pastries and breads and things that are really small scale and that yeah they make it in the back but they weren't really a commercial scale bakery what we're saying is yeah so if you know if you're somebody and you're baking bread or rolls or you know pastries cakes and your distributing and you're selling them to retail outlets or maybe you prepare them for restaurants and things of that sort and you have a small area in the front where you're able to sell directly to consumers that's very different from you're just a bakery and that's all you're doing is selling to consumers and maybe you you have a little small business where you sell to you know you smell you sell to other retail outlets but the core of your business is retail and that's i think is always the key distinction there because i can see you know why and you think about the menu fracturing facility is now serving that's seems like a big big area like if you think of the wineries in napa yeah they're pretty large scale of the tasting room is you know no bigger than maybe this room this would be a huge one for most of the wineries but and it's kept a two thousand square feet so it's thirty percent or two thousand  so so if you had you know let's say you know one of these one of these brewers got really big and they're in a twenty thousand square foot building they're not going to be able to have a six thousand square foot tasting room so they'd still be that there's a there's a you know two ways in which it's kept their can can leave us his phone number for when we have two years from  what's next i'm ok so on the order of larger changes we would skip into chapter twenty residential improvements this is where the bylaws piece of any amendments related to chickens resides so little context where the byelaws sits today on residential parcels that are one acre and larger there are provisions allowing for the keeping of livestock including chickens on what are otherwise considered to be residential property so if you're you know you have a residential property it's bigger than an acre you might have chickens you might have a go you might have any number of other animals that are not considered normal domestic pets but if you have less than an acre of land you can't have any of those things per the town's shona what the proposed change would do is it would exempt female poultry chickens not roosters from the one acre rule so all of the other provisions that are in the byelaw including things about you know dust noise odor things like that which still apply in regards to  structures chicken coops this amendment would make them subject to the normal setbacks that would exist if you were just building a backyard shed so based on the baseline zoning district generally that means fifteen feet in the rear and ten feet on the side yards in the r c d and b c d where this would be most likely to take place and that's really that's really it in terms of what happens in the regardless of whether you have an acre or less and this is obviously anticipation of the town possibly taking on some finer regulation in particular of backyard chickens through an ordinance more keyed into health and safety and administrative matters related to that we're going to discuss in an ordinance later on tonight regardless of what happens if we decided tonight not to do an ordinance would we would not want to do it we would not to want to do the violent change perhaps so there would be there would be some added per missive  in the town as it relates to chickens if you were to adopt the byelection and not adopt the organs that said in the time we've been here the last ten years i don't believe we've taken a single chicken complaint is that correct well we've had some chicken calls and they they they they seem to invariably stop short of a complaint they ask for information and  but they don't actually formalize a complaint and we don't engage in zoning in foresman just on an inquiry for information if somebody were to complain we would you know we would look into it and intervene as a program was appropriate but i guess your question terry the selector could do a variety of things one is you could approve what has been proposed here from the planning commission and approve some variation of what eric is going to address later on  you could approve this in the by law and not approve the piece that eric is is going to talk about later you could not approve that and you could not approve this so in my view you have all three of those options available to you you know where that's getting at is if you were to exempt the female poultry as proposed here in the by law i think you'd have to sort of judge what's the what's the element of risk that we would run as a town that that would somehow create a problem but the other questions regarding this i ask you just to yank did you have any was there a discussion on this in terms one way or the other good bad indifferent within the commission that's worthy of noting bridget was a nobody had a real problem with this i think it's fair to say that the commission was in support that it didn't really it wasn't a good and zoning wasn't a good violence i think it leaves the door open that you mean i mean i want open and these the children for talent is something just to think about in general well yes so today if someone on a lot smaller than an acre was keeping chickens and they were causing a problem and there was a complaint as zoning in force that would be rather simple because you'd say you're keeping livestock on a lot smaller than an acre that's clearly not allowed you to stop with an exemption as this is drafted what you would have to do is the zoning administrator if you were in forcing it under zoning is say you're creating a nuisance as it's been discussed in the violence of the in the political language is there but it might not be as simple as just looking up the watch size so is now the time or is it later tonight to talk about the female versus female chickens versus just chickens and that it's more it's personal i wonder how natural that is but we heard when we heard the public health folks come they talked about when you buy chickens there's like an eighty percent chance those female chickens you bought are going to turn out not to be all female and and so part of me is sitting there saying you're putting the person who purchased these chickens in a very awkward position because they paid for something something slightly different got delivered and now they are in violation of the town so named and possibly a town or  is going to be my point you know clearly that the reasoning is is it's easier to deal with noise if what you're being permissive about is female poultry and not roosters we did discover the course of our research that there are  relate or will save it for then but other would you would be allowing a structure for roosters for the keeping of roosters ok but they have to have an acre of land and then it would have to be sited x number of feet does help one more issue ok there's one more that generated a large amount of conversation at the planning commission and elsewhere and that's related to adaptive reuse of historic barns so a little bit of background on this issue that that's part of the story for sure so in the year initial adoption of this by a law in two thousand and eight two thousand and nine there were some provisions written in intended to encourage the restoration and adaptive reuse of historic barns and at the time they had nothing to do with having a wedding inside of a barn what was written into the allowing for multifamily housing to be established as part of a restoration project for historic barbe so out in the agricultural world residential part of town normally you can have a single family home or a duplex one way to get somebody to fix up an old barn was to let them convert it into a number of apartments so the provision in the by law in the ag world chapters who are in chapter thirty one since june of two thousand and nine has allowed for that and has said you can you can restore a historic barn for this housing purpose and it has said well what makes a barn historic well it's either on the national register it's on the state register of historic places or the in consultation with the historic an architectural advisory committee determines otherwise that the bar is historic and that language has just kind of sat since june of two thousand and nine no applicant has taken advantage of the historic barm provisions as they relate to ration of housing so another up and coming thing in vermont much like craft beer is is the repurchasing of barnes as event facilities and particularly what we would think of as wedding for and we had a barn the ice barn which was restored and where there was a lot of demand for this type of use and when the owner came to us and said this is this is what i'm doing this is what i want to do with this barn a couple of years ago we really didn't have any provision in the by a law that would allow that kind of use in that structure and at the same time we had a couple of developers calling us saying well i'd like to buy a piece of or a willesden land and build a brand new barn and call it you know my wedding party corporate it and start having weddings out there which would be a commercial use very unlike anything else that you know we permit in the district that said the planning commission select board work on some language to piggyback on the existing historic barn language to also allow this banquet facility use in a restored historic barn under the same criteria for what would make a barn historic under the same criteria related to the derby's review  of whether something was historic or not if it wasn't on one of the two west's and the restoration plan as well so we had that provision and under that provision the barn was reviewed by the development review board yes it's on the state list yes it's restored appropriately yes all the other site plan and by a lot compliances are there the parking is out equipment cetera et cetera to allow this banquet facilit the next wedding barn that was proposed was not on the national or state lists and thus determination of whether the bars historic or not fell to the d r v and the d was witness to a hearing of involving in part doing historic preservation professionals arguing whether or not reassemble barn was historic or not  due to how far gone it was when it was picked up and put back together and the ways it had been modified and everything else and so this as you might imagine can get very technical experts can disagree about how how much something is changed before it's not historic anymore that application ended up being withdrawn before the derby had to run or a final decision there were some other issues with it it was it was controversial for some other reasons related to just the kinds of impacts that that sort of facility might have on a rural neighborhood and the feedback we the staff got from the d r v was that they really felt that whether or not something was  historic would be something better left to the experts and better left of the systems in place that are there to determine whether a bar is historic or not so you know by way of parallel the derby doesn't determine whether something's  testimony of well and scientists in the confirmation of their work by state well as professionals in the case of the bar as we did seek some input from the state historic preservation folks when this application was pending and the advice we got was well i hear you're trying to decide whether this part is historic or not you really ought to follow the same standards we do when we decide whether to list a structure or guide you know the board rightfully i think said well if that's what we're supposed to be doing anyway why don't we just have a criterion the says it needs to be on the western not and that's the amendment that's in front of you is it would remove the discretion of the d r v to decide that a barn was historic and say if you'd like to restore historic barn for one of these purposes  and it needs to be on one of these two lists which means professionals have reviewed it have made a determination already and that can simply be presented to the board  questions so i have a question on your stand what you're doing but my question is for a business person do buy a piece of land and put up a bird and mak normal zoning would anticipate a commercial use like that would happen in tough corners it would look like a barn but you know you would want to you know that this would normally be a conference facility or a banquet facility or a restaurant or something like that said so the intent terry of the provision is that so we have a lot of language in our town plan and a lot of language in our byelaws that talk about what we really want either to see happen or not see happen is the case maybe in the aggro part of town which is roughly seventy five to eighty percent of the land area of willesden and we want to preserve a working landscape a working farm something that's been there  this is one of the ways you can help a farmer of like that generate revenue and preserve those structures which have been an important part of the landscape for a long time and that's the emphasis on the historic store portion of it so you this ordinance would preclude somebody from taking you know historic burn and making it look like a los vegas wedding chapel you think couldn't do that right that they would have to they would have to follow the state's guidelines for the restoration historic structures so the state has a provision that allows that then the answer would be yes but if the state doesn't he has i'm assuming it it's in line with your question in the op and not maybe out the opposite but if somebody were to build what otherwise looks like a historic barn but in fact is a modern you know reproduction that would not be ok also by  a good questions for us for example under the current rules gosh what if somebody bought a barn from the northeast kingdom rise example that and you know drag it down to the west and right it's highly unlikely such a structure would be all because of that change in location and you know so that is the intent was really to limit this to encouraging the restoration of farms that are already here in town you know generally where they are already and that sort of thing that example that  the chicken language  work can make changes but it would probably have to schedule over here if you are just there was a procedural question with anything right so if if there are going to be substantive changes to its proposed statute provides that it has to be sent back to the planning commission for comment and then come back to you so doesn't mean the planning commission has to agree with you but they have to be given an opportunity to comment on it one way or the other so it would  or if we were when we took up the chicken regulation item we could make a motion at that point in time to remain and get back to the planning commission here for a while and try to figure out the order of things perhaps we can do the convenience of the existing of our way to the developer blackrock to convey ownership of a sixty by a hundred seventy five foot right of way currently owned by the town to black rock construction for the purpose of blackrock constructing a private road so the land in question was right of way that was reserved for a possible future road back in the day when the south ridge development was approved by the planning commission in one thousand nine hundred three under su p eighty seven thirty four  and so when that happens the developer prepares we require them to prepare and hear about the offer to dedicate and that means the town can take control of the land anytime we want but we're not under any other ship drive now long term there's a high likelihood that the roads within the northridge proposed northridge development would be public but in the short run it would be private private simply because it's only going to serve a small number of the wellings and it's not going to connect anything else it's just going to provide access to that one project and that's in keeping with language that we have in our public works ordinance now long term if the project fully builds out the looking for a right of way to be reserved much like what was done with south ridge on the north side of this property for future road connection because there's a fairly good probability that the land to the north of this property would come in to develop at some point in time we know it's really no way that would be but it's it's it's a it's reasonable that that's likely to happen the a time at which we would want all of those roads to become public which would mean we take over the maintenance liability the plowing of the streets etc all of those things so the blackrock project does have an to allow a private developer to build a private street over town on land which is why you have this request for the conveyance i did in my memory provide you some language out connectivity both from the town plan as well as within our byelaw this idea of of projects connecting and having an interconnected network of street is something that's important the fact that we reserve this right of way over twenty years ago now i think  it speaks to the fact that this is always been a been a long term it's a ration of the town and in how we manage our development regulations so what we would be looking to have happen is so if you are so inclined you would convey the land to blackrock so that they could build the road as part of the permit ing the full build out of all the permit ing we would get an error bocce ball offer to dedicate from blackrock to basically to give us all this stuff back in the event that the that the road is going to become public so then we can just we can just take it over and then go from there is i think i totally get it but i still feel i need to ask is there any local opposition to this have you know express their concerns you know whether it's traffic or where it's going to be like for construction and those kinds of things so you know there have been folks who have raised some concerns the project was just opposition beyond the mitigation measures that were requested and approved by the d r be as part of the hearing process that's that's not known at this time and there's a process building here if the to to the property that is correct so get it fall build out geoff so this when you get access from the south to this piece of land and that you know we were on time to get there would be a stop  on the north side and and then my last this is a this is a common question is the piece of land that the town owns that's considering conveying this has been there for quite a while people were bought and southridge there would have or should have been informed about this connection this i'm actually called a connection this piece of public loan owned land that was in vision to be a connection actually yeah that's true except that it's not i don't believe technically the terms that we have  yes i actually i'm glad that's happening because of my thought i've never liked it really nation and have a discussion and then vote the same evening for various reasons and put it gives me time to think about things it gets time the public a chance to hear what we said and be like wait a second or gosh do i support this very glad that that's actually the procedure allocation ordinance our favorite one of the highlights of the year and and briefly what it the purpose of this is is that each year the select board has to approve a group of the town's sewer capacity that becomes available for the staff to administer to applicants that might want to purchase that capacity to look up to the town sewer system or to enhance their utilization hounds sewer system and so during the course of the year when it output can't comes to staff and makes a request we have to look up in the various categories of the sewer allocation ordinance how much capacity we have available and whether or not their request is going to fit within within the amount that's available so there's some language time the amount of allocation that you're asked to make available it's in keeping with policies that are contained within the town plan and part of our residential growth management system etc and we try to set this up so that we're looking at capacity and what's available over a twenty year timeframe i mentioned that we've been in the process of increasing the amount of our capacity we've we completed some of that edition recently we're still in the process of acquiring some additional one that's completed in f y twenty two will have a million eighty thousand gallons of capacity so in terms  of the exercise here is we have to look at how much capacity we have how much how much we're using how much we've already committed to people how much is left how much is a good reserve and then there's a math exercise that's embedded in this and i'll walk that through you through that very quickly on page three there's a couple of charts there which we use to monitor both sort of long term and short term trends for how capacity is being utilized about ten years ago or between ten and twenty years ago that the view of what was happening in the future looked very different than what we've seen over the past ten years where the amount of flow in the system has been roughly flat even though the number of households has increased the number of businesses has and have increased there's a variety of reasons for that but it's taken some of the edge off in terms of our making capacity available because of that  so when we go over to that to the numbers on page four it really shows you that how we get to the you know the whole how we get the allocations we take how much we have available we take out how much is flowing through the system we take out how much has been committed or sold to somebody but it's not online yet and there's a number for reserve i will point out that terry send me an e mail and pointed out that the amount of capacity reported in table two was different from the amount that was reported in the taxed and i looked that up today and it turns out the number in the table is correct so ok just a matter of correcting the number that was in the taxed fortunately  otherwise would have been all kinds of directions so we go through that and in this twenty year period it gives us just under two hundred sixty thousand gallons a day and then you divide that by twenty years  and it brings you to roughly about thirteen thousand gallons a day of capacity a year for twenty years and that would be is if you were giving that exact same amount out every single year we would have enough to do that for that twenty year period what we do see historically and is reported in that in one of the later tables in the report is that what we tend to see is the average is that we actually give out a lot less than that and there is some variation it goes up and down from year to year  but in terms of what we actually see long term it's significantly less than that and on page six or seven you see table three and that shows year by year how much capacity the select board approves as well as the ten year average there on the far right and then on table for out of that pasty that we make available how much we actually literally sell  new users and so when you look at the at the ten year average and you average out all those categories it's it's just under eleven thousand gallons a day so that's that sort of is the trend so the trend is less than the thirteen thousand gallons a day on average so that said this year this is probably i think i would argue this is probably the most i'm not going to say difficult complicated decision for the slack board in terms of the amount of allocation that goes in the various categories and the reason for it is this so when i first got here about ten years ago on the amount of capacity that we were putting in for example new commercial and industrial it was roughly around two thousand gallons a day and several years ago when we came to the realization that we had more capacity available than we had had stork early on and there were some there was discussion at the select board and decision was made that we should increase the amount of capacity that was in that category as well as increase the amount of capacity that we placed in encourage specific development and the rationale was if we have it available and somebody comes in with it we want to have it to be available to them we would want to deny them so so that was the system that was made and so that's been a policy that's been indicted in attachment a i want to say at least the last five or six years during that period of time we had one instance where we there were two instances where we gave out ten thousand gallons a day under encourage specific development one was last year for the hotel and that was a split phone as you may recall and then the other was three or four years ago mountain came in and they requested ten thousand gallons a day out of encourage specific development so those are sort of to know where these things so this year there's another hotel in the pipeline and that hotel has told us that they estimate that they're like they need about twelve thousand gallons a day of additional capacity so based on the discussion that we had under encouraged pacific development last year i have placed that twelve thousand gallons of necessary capacity and add it to the seventy five hundred gallons a day in new commercial industrial so over the last several years you have been approving seventy five hundred gallons a day in that category for the purpose of the proposal i'm assuming you would want to do that again in adding the twelve thousand gallons to that now there are other options that you have available clearly you know one is you could you could reduce the amount of capacity instead of seventy five hundred gallons that could be reduced to some measure you could also  say that the hotel should come back in under encourage specific development now i have not proposed it in that way as i said because you had a split vote last year so i simply want to inform you that this hotel is out there on its it does not have an approval from the d r p yet but there's a pretty good likelihood that it could get approval and then they would need to have sewer allocation in order to build that hotel so i think that's the question is how is it how is it that we want to handle handle that sort of kind of outlier of the day so we are also also know that we are in tissue paid ing some additional demand for new residential this year than we've had in previous years but that and that shell is that is the crux of the hundred on the commercial i am actually going to argue something on the encourage specific development it might be a split vote again the experience we had back in january with a hotel taught me that there were i did not see a difference between normal commercial industrial in an application and specific encouraging specific development i just didn't see where that project was really doing that or stated differently there could be many a multitude of of our projects that you could have made the same exact type of argument  for and so my point is is that to me that category encourage specific development has gotten meaningless so it's kind of like why haven't you know because we set the ball and when i say load i don't mean that negatively it's just you know it was it was a standard commercial type development that met that criteria so are we really are we really protecting as a goal when when we do that and conveyed conclusion that we really aren't and it's not a negative comment i hope it isn't taken that way so i just don't see the need for that category why not just have one commercial category and and maybe have it you thousand five plus the ten and around that to thirty and sort of in support of that if you will is over time i've kind of question you know should we have some sort of commercial industrial type growth management and will stand and the answer is pretty much always come back to you no no no how would you do it will it would have would it really serve a purpose which is very different from do we want to have some sort of residential growth  management which of course we currently do so i think that kind of ties into that also is you know having a larger allocation for the commercial side of things and then mike my other comment is going to be in a just a limit to this once again you know great job on putting this together i think it's a very good robust process that we you have to fine tune might be a way to put it but when i look at what's being proposed to forty two thousand eight ninety and which is over three times the amount that comes out and we do the math if you take the available capacity and divide it by twenty years it's you know that starts to raise red flags for me meaning it's it's it's too  much i would feel more comfortable if it was a lower factor you know two or something like that would be what is my comments or questions or co request from p t c and they built a dormitory and so we don't consider dormitories to be we don't we don't count them as housing units like we would count new houses new apartments they fall into a different category sparingly the other thing i think this is part of the history is is not only does it accommodate uses that don't fit neatly into the other existing categories but the other is that and this would be something i would throw  consideration is that unlike all the other categories in the table it gives you control over whether or not it gets allocated or not so remember what you approve the allocation schedule the decision process is of bruce prepares the form collects the fee and he quickly checks off that he recommends it and then it goes to me and i check off whether i recommended and they record proves that it's all that administr happens very quickly you you don't see it and so that that's something for you to consider as to whether or not it's of value to you to be able to have that additional input into the process whether it's green mountain or a hotel or some other use that we we can't anticipate you would have to sign off on it first and i think part of the history of why that's there is because there was a period of time when the amount of capacity that was available in the system was very very sparse and there was not a lot of leeway and we were in a different era now and things are different and and maybe that that thinking is is passe and i think that's that's for you to wrestle with and decide but that's part  history of why that's there and so that you know when a big a big lumping requests like that comes then you get to know about it and you get think about it and vote on it before that decision gets ma encouraging specific development you dislike board should you might be i could here and there's an argument that we should have reviewed that one hotel that's coming down the future which is even asking for more capacity i'm always i'll help you to understand that as i'm always paying attention listening to to what all of you say when i'm here and so i took that into consideration in my recommendation i think quite frankly you could go either way i understanding the history and the sensitivity to big chunks of allocation going out the door i would wonder why you wouldn't want to have some additional say over it before it goes out i would just sort of raise that as a question from a staff perspective if it doesn't raise a big fuss for you know certainly for me in any way but from your perspective i think that's part of the consideration is whether or not you feel you need to have some additional i don't know some additional input some additional decision making on that i think the best way for me to answer that would be in those cases where the use is in our current zoning it's in lawyers and zoning i feel comfortable with staff in cases were it isn't or maybe it's a question mark where there is or isn't then that would be a case where maybe it should come as well as the designing piece walls things are nice and i would add to that it's also consistent with my view of seward should be there to support the development of the town wants to see and not the other way around and i don't know how much that added to the discussion but it's it's again if it's a nurse consistent with our zoning then the out and we have the we have the capability to provide allocation then it should happen through in a ministry to process not through a select board process of the sewer allocation ordinance for fiscal year two thousand and nineteen with the following changes on the table the table five category five point two point five point two point two new commercial and industrial read thirty thousand there but there would be no those same table no section five kind of allocation because we would run out that's correct well be well before the so it seems like we should have some thoughtful that that you're not doing a thoughtful analysis but i think the reason you put that in there is to propose t what i see happening pretensions down the road is if we are using up let's say the majority of it in this case for forty two eight ninety gallons if we're start to use up most of what is being recommended to us then the town planners to start modifying how much is in future years because if he doesn't then we are potentially going to run out of capacity before the twenty years is over and that's exactly the situation we want to avoid well it little bit different we approve it every year because history has shown us that we don't use as much as we allocate we don't sell as much as we allocate that could change down the road and already we're starting to hear that is changing down the road because we're seeing more commercial interest in the list and from a commercial side of things commercial retail whatever side effects and so if if two or three years down the road  i personally if if i'm still on the select board in reviewing this and i see that trend i will be raising my hand much more forcefully saying this just doesn't make sense because the trend that we saw and the late whatever you call two thousand teens has changed and thus we need to change this because of that change it very similar to why we changed back after we got off that steep curve and work flattened out with that well that's that's a huge unknown i mean that's that's not a given by a lot because we yeah after this next fifty thousand is over i don't know if we'll be able to get any chickens regulation so maybe before you go through this can you maybe just say  i assume you're proposing this because you think we need to do this there's a reason we need to regulate you know the keeping of chickens we need to regulate the oh people over in one t from if it wants to pursue this ok yeah i thought the south burlington ordinance was written well so that's when i think i looked at this first came up you know there's some time ago a lot of this is lifted from there ok purpose why we doing this what why we have the have the authority to do this but one point key provision i highlight in that section is it does not override any restrictions put in place by a private member's association here next section requiring a permit for the time period i put draft language in there the same timeframe as a dog license something similar there's an idea in terms of charging fees twenty dollars for the first year and then ten dollars following that ethics charges thirty five dollars for the first year ten dollars after that and sell product and charges to the twenty and ten the same structure here because the requirement to post the permit not i say when i say that i'm thinking your neighbor puts chickens and and because maybe if you're in good terms the neighbor you do is ask the neighbor or they permit it you do have a permit for that and the easier way of life just to have a permit posted so that yeah well that that puts a load on the town than just i'm just trying to understand certainly be are next section of the exceptions that was just standard language i took from the two of or other ordinance that that were considered here next section a number and type of chickens allowed this is one what well we looked at here and some feedback have from the community is thinking you know depending on where somebody lives if you do you want to have a blanket number of chickens throughout town or would it be had on how much land the person categories don't want to exceed the maximum number of chickens set they could apply for the town for this flock quality waiver of town could consider ok kind of look at where they're located with other neighborhoods like does it make sense for them the have a greater number of chickens farming threshold and one of the middle of farming thresholds i thought was most vocal here is that someone's selling in excess of two thousand dollars worth of eggs the previous year i did some research rough numbers i figured they would need at least thirty five chickens which is that the ted corrected me but i'm just quoting what the ordinance says female chickens only and i guess my question is along the lines of i  get the point and roosters and noise and everybody loves chickens i guess doesn't like or likes to a lot of us degree roosters but is that practical is it practical maybe isn't the best word but for somebody who's raising chickens is it easy just to have i'm not an obviously a chicken person yet is it easy to limit to just chickens or female chickens because i can speak to what i've seen in my research for other organs as i've seen in the other towns that it's just chickens and not research but i was i found it interesting it to me were putting i could see were i would feel uncomfortable to get this delivery of chickens i ordered chickens thinking they would all be female because i ordered chickens not roosters but i get delivered a box with five chickens and one rooster in it unbeknown to me it just it just it is going to put me in an awkward position i know you section in closures and a lot of this is lifted from a whole other towns had in place here i'm sorry with the noncommercial use persons sell legs so i'm thinking of for instance in our office where somebody people lot of people i work with actually have chickens will bring in eggs they make it known there's a can to put money in and you can take home a dozen eggs so somebody who  was doing that under this ordinance would be in violation of the ordinance technically as it's written right now it's and i understand a person who's got to stand out by the side of the road saying you know fresh eggs for of the ordinance along those lines eric just when i look at your table too if this is supposed to be noncommercial farm how many reading online and some some research was talking about four square feet of floor space per bird so i added a little bit extra for each one to get those those square footage is wanted down to one nineteen a stay  moving along my only comment in all of this was kind of lines up with ted said why wouldn't we just regulate what's on the small good decision for the board there wouldn't be one thing i was thinking about where you know thing about our agricultural residential zoning district and i was looking at what the parcels look like in that district my go  in terms of if there's no regulation on the quantity someone could have under an acre and have x amount of chickens or some could have a large law and there's restricted to not a chickens to or we can be one quantity for everyone but some of the policy issues the rest of here the only thing i was thinking of along boids was you're adding regulations where they don't exist and i'm not sure you would have to tell us whether there are problems existing today imposing regulations on all these places including like ten acre firms who might have this in a chicken coop in the middle then we're going to tell them oh we don't like your chicken coop it's got to be different and i'm not sure we have any problems today so should we have tailored this to be just the below one acre six words total yeah yeah basically make it really simple  consensus we could as a staff to reconstruct these general i don't think chickens belong in town it didn't work and religion hasn't worked in areas if you will i would rather see i should come up with a chicken go up quite honestly if you want to do this there and have chickens best chicken go there you go but m everybody on this road decided to have chickens and you've got six per house and there's no way you're going to tell me you're going to contain all of these things are dogs get this eat some of these pet chicken and i just see all of these things happening and i just don't see chickens for town that's me i understand that people are trying to do i also think some of this for some people they're very serious and it's a it's a and it's a passion and things that they do long term other people are going to be picking up because it regulate that one point one acre and larger you know they have one hundred chickens if they're not a nuisance they can have one hundred chickens if they are new since then we have to figure out how to enforce that they are nice and somebody complains about it that's between the private neighbors and whatever that's not or we're not to we're not trying to do anything with that right well we haven't had a i'm i'm just basing this on we haven't had lighting basically so it wouldn't be many adjoining properties or disruptor neighbors predators rodents insects and parasites one would take all necessary action to bait the the attraction of these of these critters and the chills section of this that the next section gets into enforcement would be for on the waste storage in removal so yes it sounds like this is saying it has to be removed and stored for a short amount of time but it has to be removed if somebody wanted to compost it or use it in their garden and dispose of it on on their own property would that be allowed similar to how somebody might compost their food waste right now on their own property on it on less than an acre we have all stored manure shall be covered by a fully enclosed container at work compost we put some language in there that allows that and of course the nuisance provisions would kick and if you don't do a good job of it it seems like the this is just trying to prevent them storing question if you do you know if you give to are there any health concerns for companies doing chicken manure and then using it in your garden immerses what we get that certain been treated or done whatever through some other large facility that does and all of those can run a risk can really help risk is there more of one when you started getting chicken cow whatever it is manure that you're doing that is there something more that we would have to worry about that could we could potentially be spreading to children or sentence or seconds and it's not the way it's worded it's not really oh ok i got it ok my concern here if i could expression a little bit differently is folks who have chickens are probably the tendency is going to be and i assume the bass tendencies are going to be to manage that waste on their own property and they're not going to be transporting it somewhere else for it to be disposed of and as we consider now we want to regulate chickens we need to take that into consideration too it just it's just not going to leave the property and so if we righted ordinance that says you have to manage it in a way that leaves the proper chickens oh long would it take to get twenty gallons of chicken broth he said you would still call twenty gallons of chicken droppings because they you know as you compost them with shavings in all this you're grilling i assume at some point to two years and i have the menorah purpose and there's no odor as long as you're turning it into it with other things you know the weeds go in there with the dirt on them and so i would feel that what you already have in there about noise the odor there should be no at that point and that it had reasons that is there a legal definition of expeditious was there but he had that i definitely want to see said thing if you're going to do this that you have very tight timeframes for correcting these issues and not extending the man additional thirty days in additional thirty days is this the way the other towns have done it too and it's this kind of a long process when i have to i haven't looked at it cross reference it in the last few weeks i can i can check that i know i'm on the model bus to be consistent with with a shotgun to your chicken coop or you know it just seems like we should have some kind of a short cut process and people should understand this upfront that you know we're doing this because people  to you know have this ability but also we have to be conscious of the fact that small lots mean close neighbors and you know the tolerance levels can be low and when step one stop shopping that's what if it's but if it's a nuisance you know not for a nuisance but a public health problem this would be the path for a nuisance people becoming ill from so appeal within x number of days ten or fifteen and i have a problem with the going to the health officer even if it is a nuisance issue more than it is a health issue because the you know i mean the how tailormade we can make it is a provided however it is a health issue and not a nuisance issue i mean no if the health officer is going to look at it and say you know this is more of a nuisance issue i'm going to keep it in place and let it go to the select board or i don't think that's a problem think maybe it's the right tone that says if you want to have chickens in a small area with neighbors close neighbors you know it's going to be highly regulated because we don't want complaining neighbors we want i don't know if you have thought about you know if we do all this some information back and you know for when people come and get a permit to make sure they know the level and how quickly remedies can be  including there's a big literature on public health information to you you want to maybe dissuade the people who are that serious right now i think it should be a little bit higher so that people realize it's a serious thing that's just start yeah sure after touching your belly this information is out there and it is something that people don't necessarily think especially because the chips are often in their house when they come in and dale they need to be nine degrees hands having the right shoes i don't know how you get warrants that gets that clearly enough across to people that you could be setting yourself up to get very very sick and not even realizing it because you thought this would be a great not exactly saying that but that is where the real prevention is and and that maybe is that something that legislators are regulated in some way and maybe that's a community that's something that we can do as a warning or however you would do that plus when somebody comes in and asks for the permit you could provide the same package and my temptation to have them sign off that they burden do you think your video might be more so then a person with a needle their flock would have to get down to zero before they could buy another six chickens so that when the truth is do you have coming out right now i have in a flock how many numbers there are and so you just kind of have to decide every year and i have a low enough number there i can ask six one so i try to stay around a dozen and seven right now but i chickens but it's not really happening here it could potentially because the ones that can be passed between humans and chickens but did and did did these not happen here we have two special event permits the first is scheduled for april sixth and it is scheduled for three twenty nine harvest lane which is natural nature or natural i that's one as a liquor license this is from burlington beer they already have a first class license this would be a second class license which allows them to sell take out  is the first time just by comparison the good water brewery already has a first and second class i'm really struggling because i'm a was a big proponent of catamount and although i know one dissenting vote will not crushed this license deal either but i  back to when this was sold to us and in the public discussions nowhere was it mentioned that this was a condition it seems like we should have a process rick where you come to the select board for some discussion or some guidance when something so material changes for something so big i don't know what we actually presented were priests pretty much the same time we learned about it so it's not it's not like we had this information a staff level and oh i don't know what the first time i heard about it was when i saw the license agree materially what we we thought we had all got on board for and it feels like we've gotten to the point where we're so far down the pipe people feel like well it's a done deal and i guess i never feel that way i feel like you know there's a lot of time to do things and doing right and i don't feel like i'm in any rush on the other hand i  mean i certainly don't want to kill the catamount deal but i feel like this should have been brought to us to be discussed and shared about what to do about it rather than going down the line it was like you're held over a barrel right you're basically told what i felt to play out i think it was the town either of melinda or yourself and i guess it would be you because you must have heard linda when it was shared maybe that's one of the things we can talk about in a retreat as well as how that happens because i feel like at this point people are of the opinion well gosh we're going to get this done  to see catamount happen don't get me wrong i'm a huge proponent but i also want to see the town maintain spending you know six hundred thousand dollars of taxpayer money and like make sure the town  runs it in represents the town people's interests and not just a motorbike seller but that's my sense is from the time you started negotiating over this agreement and when we first saw it was a relatively short amount of time i heard of his months ok so other people have brought this to me and shared with this carving out this nice area to create a you know the continue the mountain bike center but we're disappointed that kind of mountain viewed as only a mountain bike center i think that would be it be it's potential is so much more i hopefully will realize that i'm hoping so too that's why i was excited because i thought i didn't want to be just a mountain bike to continue this discussion will be talked about the license again right but my point wasn't necessarily didn't want to limit it to that to my point was when something so materially changes and something we had material change it was it was something it was an initial thing that i was surprised at but i don't think it changed it's just that i assume the catamounts maybe because family and maybe the page family also their view of how this was going to should proceed forward and my expectation for how something like this would proceed forward which is two different things and didn't find out about it to the one document that would really spell it out was in front of me and that was like oh