i'll call a meeting to order and i'll begin by just reading the agenda for this meeting we have two pieces we have one piece of continued business which is a request to the  but anyway this is too pretty for barber farm roads so that's the that's the first thing that's ever training business and then we have a new business which is a sketch plan revealed of a minor subdivision at fifty five skunk hollow road n fourteen so that's our agenda for tonight i'll just remind everyone that we this meeting will be conducted in the orderly manner consistent with our rules of procedure i will walk you through everything as we go along so you don't need to have them in front of you but if you're interested in getting a written copy of the rules of procedure you can get them from jam and point so at this point i want to request a disclosure of any conflict of interest or any ex parte communication with board members and municipality a person owning or occupying property in the immediate neighborhood of a property that subject to any zoning decision or act who can demonstrate a physical or environmental impact on a person's interest one of the criteria viewed and who alleges that the decision or act proceeding in environmental court pursuant to state statute participation consists of offering to or or or written testimony evidence or statement of concern relate to the subject of the proceedings so the reason i explain all of this is that if there was to be a appeal of a of the decision we make we would need as part of that appeal they would have to establish who was an interested party and if you're a person and so just so you know that the you to to be an interesting person to protect your to protect that status you have to participate and we need to know that so we don't make a determination as the party status but it's part of our that's part of our process we make sure we know who participated so there's two things about that one is their sanity going around so if you're here for you should sign in and the second thing is that when you decide when you speak when you participate in whatever way please tell us your name for the re when we can get it down in minutes ok calling around and everyone see it ok and then finally this is a cause a traditional hearing so anyone who intends to speak must be sworn in so what i'll do is i'll read the oath and then you just say i do i hereby swear that the evidence i give in the ca address all the comments made previously in that nature  i don't know that i don't know that we have explicit need over there so i guess you know i have the know how to address it from that point f permits in place as appropriate for the use now but she saying if it may be that the state doesn't require there to be any facilities in this any bathroom in this facility if they don't require and you don't have to provide them if you don't  they're happy with whatever the situation is that we don't have jurisdiction we don't have further jurisdiction we just walk them so that we're not proving something that the state understood and agreed so we just we just leave it to them for thinking that i sourced in their maintenance issues and our hope is to reclaim some of those materials and frankly embellish this barn because there was some repairs done in the barn and there i don't know i'm guessing in the last fifteen or ten our ability you know we want to we want to make it a little jewel in the corner instead of you know in the corner if you could remind me there was something about part of the structure and didn't destroy it's a part of the structure renovation reconstruction or rehab as part of this application and what i'm understanding from others and from what the applicant what you're applying for is you don't if you do not you're not asking at this point for the purpose to do renovation because actually that's correct so that being the case this doesn't apply however since you since this is a adaptive reuse structure and that is that in the future then if you ask in the future for a building permit to for example do some kind of sort of a renovation these these guidelines will come into play because we're trying to because you're trying to maintain that status as an adaptive reuse of a storage bill so i think that seven to four four still should be at the back of your mind for these few for this future work because if you go if you can because in the future union you need a building permit to do that sort of work that's one this weekend and at this point i think we're clear you're done proposing i of so i think that the that's thank you jennifer gray not i think we had already disposed of a couple of those without but the it's good to clarify we did disclose over the bridge to the previous part of the hearing the question of eligibility and whether the the structure was old enough to them and there's there was some paper trail about it being a story building in some previous   and from what i read in the staff no it's the majority of the land it's not it's the that's not going to be the one of the two buildings is but that would be the provision that we would be looking at her i'm not sure if that's relevant for the present personal sense has no bearing on the right away not sure there are one for the present parcel it's not shown on the drawings that way but this isn't right understand so so dr just to be clear that the you did that was so my statement was correct that though the l shaped right of way they've shown is to the benefit of ac over this the present person which is going to study life that's correct and so those that right of way does not extinguish in this proposal it would be now personally bright bright because  logging things like that so it's pretty easy there's an open space land which is owned and some sort of owners association by the by the various other owners what would you propose what are you proposing as the ownership of four lottery did access for wouldn't be part of the deed restriction per se but the fact that there is a management plan would be required as a condition so and then that's up to you to sort of come up with american plan which meets today which there's a barn there's a bargain up you know around my tractor through there so there's a culvert that had previously i come to the town to get approval back when i did initially first the property be obstructionist but i also want to stay orderly here so let's let's wait i'm going to overcome and i will make sure that everything's clear at that point i do want to make sure that we have all the interventions everything is clear but i don't want to do it in the way that we're supposed to do it so do everything else from the board before we go public nobody was worried fact the septic system was smaller than what i thought it was going to be i know that plant hasn't made it to the state yet but you know they were there and i don't know if you know some of the engineering but  think it's very steep and the wetland is significantly if i had to guess i would say it's probably two hundred yards from where the structure would be pretty significant place back i don't know  proposed here codes are problematic only in that they concentrate water flows so there they oftentimes are part of that plan and but you know it's not our it's not our expertise to to assess a storm water plant just an exterior that it's been considered and that someone who is qualified has said that we that needs the the regulations so that's what's going to be required of you is that the engineers say and that was that that was that was a question since he's not here to give us testimony that the most see the most sort of friendly way to go forward is to condition and let him present the that with respect to those rules then the only way we could do that the only way if we decide to close this hearing tonight rather than continuing to get the information that one way to deal with it would be to condition and that what that means is going to get testimony on its night so we have to have the testimony on that issue and again the reason i'm inclined to go the other way is there it seems on likely to be an issue it's here you know but t that piece of property is going to have a right of way you should know which is something that may have to be addressed going forward that i believe in the state of maybe the engineers can redraw that at the present time right of way that is not in use is not an issue but it could be a some point in time or it may be but if you become so i'm just concerned about that is that association to that property and never accessibility you should always who is allowed to use that property you know i think it needs to be at some point or stipulated that puts a dish of constraints on other landowners whatever decision you might make tonight so that's questionable number two  want aware of the significance of the delineation between lights two and three as being a natural break relating to the vast r just prescribe a p u g as a guideline for the project especially relating to points gen thirteen one three seven we would like to recommend a few changes to the proposal presently it's a natural resource of our first concern and it has to do with subsequent ownership of the of the thirty two plus four so there's no guarantees that whoever is doing the subdivision out was going to be the long term landowners so i want to make sure of that especially it relates to the backlog that the development gets done of the developments are done that a lot is called by number or is it called common land so we like to make sure that whatever happens to be a little lot to do that that gets if this is going to be  gets designated as common land and becomes part of i'm assuming the town here is the equivalent of an overlay for it's common where that this property or a portion of property gets and relate to that my four point qualify for some kind of tax abatement as it relates to the state's current use program so twenty five acres a minimum threshold and it just appears to me aside from the recommend that it be twenty five point zero one acres oh if it needs to be that accurate so that whoever or whatever happens of the consideration and the two go hand in hand for smasher plan is part of the state's requirements for qualifying for current use oh yes and i so i was trying to find that there is a there is some provide access to large three is there does there have to be some sort of right way as part of lot three that gives it access to the public that question there's clearly there's not one proposed at this point but the question is would it be required so i'm trying to answer that question one way or the other i'm not seeing anything that says that a landlocked as long as it when it's not a when it's not a building is inherently not alive so let's get let's go on to the second question which is i think i alluded to it way that subdivisions are independent of law warm law to or any of the other adjoining parcels so feeling inferior could be conveyed in the future to anyone whether or not they were owners of any of the other laws the purpose of a homeowner's association or something to that effect is to tie them together so that their own in common in some way by the other people by the other owners that's a common form of the p d but not required so the question is what do you anticipate as the applicant what do you anticipate doing as far as ownership of what three what we see often is that there's they call the homeowners association but it has it's it's basically exists only to own the third or the third parcel so again if there's a if the way this is usually done is that it's a make it that that it's we need to make it clear when they when they're when the subdivision and stand conveyances are made where the deeds are prepared for the subdivided property theft that backs the case just about that's the way th larger than the replacement area very fair comment was that if a system were to fail of this size as being designed the replacement area would be the exact place of the system so i understand   that so overlapping seems to be ok so i think the answer to that question is of the engineers of the engineers showing on the drawings that the isolation area does so that's it that's all i'd like is i can i can tell you to answer the question i can tell you the function of the isolation area which is to say it's not only it's not allowed to put a water supply well in that isolation that's that that would not be access along with the other right so one of the other one of the other questions or comments was that the so this subdivision does not cannot extinguish the rights that akerman president the actor and probably presently as to this right away and that's already been there's already testimony to that effect and in fact the drawing show that that the right of way will still be there and that means it will be over  and there were some particular roads that were identified as court orders or whatever is that that that we are particularly interested in trying to obtain these rights of way i'll try to piece together that pedestrian access have i'm sorry it's up there on the other part of the there the existing water that is adjacent to scott hall you can actually see on the top of the lines it shows that sort of storm water retention of this proposed to be subdivided comes out goes out to the back of curls around the neck and wraps around three or four other lot so that whatever you guys decide with this project we're going to be said the president for be i can't answer your question about whether there are other cases exactly like this certainly we know that there are others to get lots on this road and other places because that's the way the regs us putin process and why the sort of watching behind doing the dimensional changes to allow smaller lots and then a larger you know area all pulled together subdivision requires so anyway that's so that's when we when we get really close we need to discuss whether it makes sense to continue for a while one of the reasons and then and so you or you can decide to do that there is a town overlay which creates a buffer around the edge of the class to wetland area where there are certain rules about what can be done in that area which again you're aware of that's part of it's compatible with what's been propose of that so there are those who are so all of those have managed plans which were set up on a case by case basis there's no there's no telling why the corporation which says a no build area you can't build in the area so if a house were to go down here on line three like you know if you as you were considering your conventional submission scenario it would have to be outside of that buffer and then the septic would have to get in there without affecting if you're able to do it back there continuing then that simplifies the question of the line because you can decide whether or not to live before we close that's correct and it's up to you but i guess i'm just one of the clear we're not saying that you need to be twenty five acres are not part of order to did you don't that's a totally up to you but it's just the conservation commission pointed out that it may be advantageously to the future owners of wild three that is to say lowers or wanted to put that in that program so me excuse me excuse me can we take the child out into the into the room and they're going to kind of finish with whatever other business thank you please chat please do it out there so so we're we're discussing the