 We have a quorum tonight, so I'm going to call us meeting to order. This is a regular scheduled meeting of the town of Berlin Development View Board. I expect one more member to show up, and we'll proceed without that individual for a moment. We'll start with introductions. Starting on my left is the zoning administrator. Tom Badowski's zoning administrator. And I'm Bob Warnick. I'm the chair. I'm Carolyn Neweasel, vice chair. Shane Mispo. And we have two applications tonight. They're both. And Ms. Poe. Those industry in the first application was the application by Nancy Carpenter and Karen Grace. Anyone else interested in that party? James. I'm sorry. OK. You just want to tell the truth, nothing but truth. No matter before this board tonight. I do. OK. You raised your hand. You were. I am. She said, oh, I'm all right. I got you, I got you. Thought that's a little hard. So I'd like to reflect that Matthew was also sworn in. OK. So why don't you go ahead and introduce yourselves and give us an overview of what you're proposing to do here. OK. I'm James Kulcher. I'm a business partner with Nancy Carpenter and Karen Grace. So what we're proposing to do is I think you're going to have to speak up last time. We're recording this. And he's OK. You good? OK. So what we're here to do is we're here to do a boundary adjustment. We sold Matt and Miriam Morris a parcel of land that's 19.1 acres with a barn with a garage. And we felt that it would be better for all of us if we just sold them all the actual lower field that's in flood and everything. Because he's a farmer. He likes to develop things like that. We've agreed on a deal. We've already closed on the first portion of the land the 19.1 acres with the barn in the garage. The other piece we needed to do a boundary adjustment to, which is right here. So right now we have the two acres, which is the house, the old herring house. Then the 19.1 is the one just behind it in orange or red. And then the whole third part of the subdivision was this, the remainder of the land, which is 27.6 acres, I believe. So what we're trying to do now is, on this page, we're trying to do a boundary adjustment where we're going to put a line just on the bottom side of the knoll that's across from the winery. And it's going to give, like it's another 14.6 acres, I believe it is, and add that to the land that we've already sold to Matt and Muriel Morris. And so that they can keep it looking beautiful. Is that boundary line that you're proposing? Is that on you, previously you came here and you created three lots? Yeah, four lots. Four lots for basic for sale. Development and sale. Is that one of the boundary lines for that lot? It is now. It's actually the last boundary line. It's the last boundary line. So that would follow that boundary line. Yeah, it follows the boundary line. Essentially, it follows the whole end of that, those lots, which is a lot here, three, four, five, and six. So they won't exist? No, lots three, four, five, and six still exist there on the knoll here. Oh, on the other side. Yeah, they're over here. This will just exist now as the flood plain. It will be hooked to the remainder of the 19 acres that he's already purchased from us, which is part of the barn and all the agricultural that's already been going on there. And the home that's in front of the old hearing house is still for sale in its own two-acre lot. Yep. OK, and anything further? I think that's it. We're just hoping that it goes through and Matt can start enjoying his land and doing some hay. And we're keeping it beautiful. I'm not sure what else we need to do. There's definitely a show up cleaning up. He has. This is only administrative. Do you have any comments? Just to, if this comes to fruition, both lots continue to meet the zoning regulations for lot size and that. So it does not create a non-conforming lot on either one of these. James mentioned some acreages that's different than Zana's application here. I thought you said 14-point something. Well, things have changed. Our surveyor, and you know who that is, Rick, I'm not sure what happened. So he gave us one number, and then when we sold the land, we had to come do an administrative adjustment, is my understanding, right? Because there was actually. This is the application you gave for this project? Right, right. So is it 15.35 acre? It must be 15.35, if that's what it went on, yeah. OK. I'm sorry. That's what it says in the picture. That's the long-term effects of the 80s. So I'm trying to get through that. That should be what it is. So 15.35 acres is what's being transferred by virtue? Transferred over on the boundary line adjustment, yeah. OK. Yeah. And that will be continuous to the other acreage which you've already sold this morning. Yes, it is. 15.35 is right here on the mile hour, and then? 19. Yeah, and then 19, yeah. Yeah. OK. Got my numbers. I'm sorry. Are there any else? No. Questions by members of the board? No. OK. Well, our findings are dictated by definitions in both the subdivision regulations and in the zoning regulations. Boundary line adjustment will have no significant impact on roads. Does it have any impact on roads? No. Rights of ways? No. Or other public facilities? And then the other thing we must find is that the boundary adjustment shall not result in creation of a non-conforming lot. And you already testified that all lots would be conforming after the correct. And no new law is being created for simply moving a line from one post to the other. Those are the litmus tests we have to go through. Questions by board members? I take that. Oh, is that a? No, I said no. Sorry, no. I thought we were creating a major breakthrough here. Maybe that was a motion. I thought maybe that was a motion. I thought maybe it was a motion. If there are no further comments or questions, did you have any questions or comments? No. So I'll move that we close application 18 national five three. Most been made in second. Any discussion of that motion? All those in favor of that motion, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Also, aye. Opposed? And this motion is carried. The hearing is closed. As in previous cases, you will issue findings. And after we go through one of the sessions, and we should see them sometime in the near future, hopefully. Thank you. Well, this is a sad story right now. I don't know. Yeah. We appreciate it. Thanks for your time. Thank you very much. Have a great evening. Stay positive. They're here. They're here. Thank you. See you later, James. Thank you. You too. Are you guys here at Bartlett Hill? Yeah. You want to come up? Susan? Yeah. Does she ask you to introduce yourselves, please? I'm Susan Law, 44 acres off of Bartlett Hill. And I'm Stephen Dio, and I just purchased 2.1 acres off of Bartlett Hill. So Sandy is coming. She thought she was going to be late. And she says if she's going to be late, that both of these individuals can speak on her behalf. OK. Any of us moving along then? Why don't you explain to the board? Oh, let me swear you in, please. It's going to tell the truth. Please raise your right hand. It's going to tell the truth. Let the truth matter before this board tonight. And the penalty is a perjury. I do. Thank you. So as in the case of the last application, why don't you explain to us what you're doing and why you're doing it, and so we understand. All right. So I guess you have the map here. Originally, when Sandy had the lines drawn up, she didn't know who the neighbors were going to be and if they would be comfortable sharing a driveway. So she added a strip of land that could potentially be used as another driveway if somebody chose to do that. When Steve and I met each other, we decided we were completely fine sharing the driveway that's already existing. And also we realized that the land, the way it was divided, wasn't really going to be able to be used by either of us for much of anything because we each had a little, I had a little triangle and he had a strip. And with the project that he was hoping to do on his lot, it made more sense if I could give him a little bit of my land and in return for the land up front, the strip that he couldn't do much with other than put in a driveway. So we agreed to basically do a land swap. Steven, you own which lot? Lot number seven. The stuff that's in the yellow. Yeah. Lot number seven, which currently includes that strip down to Bartlett Road. Correct. Tommy, any comments? A couple comments. And I've got some resolution to my comments. The strip down on Bartlett Road was really the access to potentially to the lot number seven. And this would have taken it away. And so subsequent to the last hearing, folks have bought these lots and have now are trying to get E-911 addresses. And so there will be three lots sharing off of this driveway. Once it's three lots, the E-911 requires it to be its own separate named road. So Susan petitioned the select board to name the road. And this, like we said, it has to be a private road. And so this road was built four or five years ago. The concern that select board had was it constructed to town standards. I got a letter today from Ray Washburn, third estimator and project manager for DuPois Construction who did the work and I'll just quote a piece of this. In my opinion, the private road meets or exceeds town standards. There are two culverts installed that were more extra precautions than actual storm drains. So I believe the road will meet. The select board will agree to naming that road and making a private road. So that was the concern I had about losing that strip. So I think that goes away today because of this letter. And so the other item that the select board asked these parties to consider was a road maintenance agreement as part of a this naming of a town road. So I would say that naming from Sandy and I would ask the chair to maybe confirm with the owners is that there's language that affect in their deeds so a separate stand-alone road maintenance agreement would not be needed. So I think if those two cases are in effect true, the road has been certified as constructed to town standards and that there is some sort of agreement between the two parties. I do not believe the select board will have any issue granting this private road status. So what's driving this is the 9-1-1 requirement for a road name. Select Board says the road name is going to be a private road. Correct. It would serve three lots. Correct. It would serve Susan's lot. It would serve Sandy's lot here. No. It's sold. I don't know who to list. Sold. According to the map. Well, what's your current or not? That is, yeah. That is current. So okay. So I would just maybe I would subdivision allow three lots to be served by one drive. Correct. It does. I would just like that these folks would confirm that there is that language in the D's. I haven't seen it. I've asked for that. But I have not seen that. So if nothing else the board decides to approve this and deliver the session that that would be a condition that has to be satisfied that there has to be proof that the maintenance agreement established. Go ahead. So you say there is language that affect in your D's? Yeah. When I signed all the paperwork that was one of the big things that I wanted in place because that giving an easement on my land and I had concerns about whether or not I would be stuck with the maintenance so I made sure that my attorney put that language in and she's also concerned about that too. Is it specific or does it say shared maintenance? Well, shared maintenance but it is pretty specific. It talks about that it has to be equally divided and it has a pretty specific plan in place. Does it make provisions for payment in an event that one party refuses to pay their third? I forget if it goes into the payment specifics. I got it in the car. Do you have it in the car? Do you want them to grab it now? Well, the agreement doesn't mean much unless there's some kind of backup to it. It's split in three ways but one party doesn't pay. It was pretty specific but I haven't looked at it in a few months. I mean, he has it with him. If you had that with him I'd like to see that entered into the and I don't know if yours has the same language that I can run it. I would appreciate that. I'm not sure that they would go into the selection specifics because that's sort of a legal issue after the fact. But as long as it spells out how it's supposed to be it gives them the right to go short to get the money. Or you can put a lien on them. It may be going beyond what we have for responsibility. On their deed, if it's on their deed, right? I don't know. I'm talking about stuff in my head. The mechanism isn't... I don't know. I'm just thinking that if you're it's related to the land. Anyway, in any case you can go to court. I would just recommend to this board that a condition of any permits would be that they supply those to us. And the third party has the same provisions? Yeah, no. There are different provisions of that driveway. So I would not be involved in Paul's portion way up top where I don't drive. The people up top have a responsibility. They do because both Steve and Paul have been given an easement on my land. So the three of us will have that section. Would you say we have that for the evidence? When you go to delivery, we can decide whether or not it satisfies our requirements. In that, this is what the select board is saying. My feeling is our condition will be based off on the select board of food in the private gold. If we did that, it's really not going to satisfy them or not. We've always shared the same concern. We've always told applicants who are sharing a road, you really ought to have an agreement. An enforceable agreement that spells out who's doing it. It doesn't mean you have to share it. It's got to be spelled out in the right steps. The condition of the permit would be that this be approved as a private road by the select board. Whatever the select board requires, it's up to the select board. In my opinion. This is I would say pretty specific in the plan for the maintenance payment. And it gets into quite a bit of detail about what maintenance looks like. So. It's page two, Carla. Yeah, I'm reading right now. Does it only reference your two lots? 167. Okay. 167, okay. We can review that. Anybody want to hear more about this? No, that's fine. Yeah, we can talk about it after. From my perspective. Bylaws only speak to the number of lots that can be off of the drive. The bylaws don't even say it's a private road. Three can be a right away under a private road. The reason it's being driven by private road is 9-1-1 and the select board and private road. It's a little bit beyond us, but certainly I think what select board has shared with you is a valid concern. I would tell you this, from my perspective, the only condition we would pose is that you have to get select board approval for private road. That's what your application is for. Can I ask a question before we get into it? I'm just curious on the actual boundary line. Is there a reason why that small point goes across the road? Yeah. It was going to end up being this weird little triangle in the middle of the driveway that would then... have to have part of the road in it? Well, it was going to, and yes, part of that goes back to the easement and what we all agreed to. And by doing that, it basically makes it so that the three of us are sharing the lower part. Steve and Paul are dealing with that section above me. And then Paul has his own section. So instead of having to go back and rewrite the language and get me involved in a section that is above where I'll be driving, we decided to bring it down to that point and also just to make it cleaner. Do you have anything to add to that? Any questions here? They're actually eliminating that little triangle now. No, that's not highlighted. I still got a little part of the road. That's what I was getting at. Yeah, that part right there. Typically somebody would stop it here, but that's why I was wondering why the road had the answers. I'll look at it. But the way I understand this sliver here is moving to this area here. That's the swap. So this might be color different. From here it's going to here. Wait, no. Go ahead. This is going to this. And this is going to here? This right here would actually be if this wasn't yellow. This yellow is moving where this yellow was. Because this was the pie right here of that one. So we move this one up to here. He had this weird little strip of land that you couldn't really This right here? Shane, you are correct. This is going to her lot. Yeah. And this is coming to your house. Yeah. Yeah. I guess I'm a little confused as to how the 9-1-1 address is connected to the land swap. Like how do those The elimination of the road. The second road access. Yeah. Because now that other access won't be Okay. Because Sandy had been told when she did that that she did not need to you have Yeah. And you have the easement. You can't just block someone from their land. And so that was her doing because she didn't want potentially feuding right neighbors if they didn't know each other. Decided they wanted their own to put in their own driveway. That was the only reason for she was told that's unnecessary and it's kind of a weird thing to do. Like the shape is very odd. From our perspective it was unnecessary. From the state's perspective, when there's three lots on the easement that's a different story. So that's the state requirement versus the town requirement. And I believe this board didn't know she was going to keep ownership of that property. Those other lots. The ownership have changed and there are going to be houses off of this potentially private road. E911 takes precedent. Okay. Yeah, because that was a logging road, right? That's a logging road, yes. Yeah. Just going back to where we are. I mean, the E911 is a requirement not of this board. And the select boards requirement to put a name on the road, it has to be private road. That's all, frankly, not part of our bylaws. And I guess I understand that part. I'm confused why this random strip that is not a road why we have or why that's connected to the to the getting an E911 address and I don't understand that because I don't understand that. Well, I don't understand why you can't make a decision on the land swap separate from the E911 address issue. Yeah, we can. I think we can. Okay. But for you to get for you to get satisfied, the select board needs to satisfy you. So it's become convoluted which should be all our bylaws say in terms of that access is it can serve no more than three lots. That's the only restriction we have. We do speak in terms of the widths and the size but we don't require it to be a private road. That's beyond I think it's a good idea personally but that's not a requirement of our bylaw. I think I'm speaking correctly. Yeah. So I just say the only thing really in our bylaws is the provisions I read early on the previous application which is we must find that I lost it already. No, I didn't. It's right here. That it creates no new building lots. We have a little impact on roads and I believe it'll improve the road. Yeah. We have no impact on the rights of ways. In fact it's relying on an existing right-of-way or any other public facility. And I think we'll you know I don't see that it'll have an impact on building a lot. We'll not create a lot. We'll not. We'll just move the line. We'll have no impact on roads. We'll have no impact on the right-of-ways. Um shall result in a non-conforming law, which is really important that by moving this line we haven't made a lot of non-conforming. We have not. That's your testimony, right? That's correct. It's an equal property swap. There's no net gain or loss. So I think I'm a little torn on how to hand the 9-1-1 slight board thing. I'm not a part of this bylaw. I'm not. I think it's pretty simple. That these folks give us this language in each of those two deeds that will satisfy the select board. I believe so. And this letter will satisfy the select board. Yeah. So that'll take care of the select board, but that's really not a part of our problem. No due respect. I think we work hand in glove as a community here. Mr. Chair. It was just that. It was otherwise. I'm just trying to stay straight within our bylaws. It seemed to me that we're making the decision on the boundary line adjustment. Not what to do with it. Whether it's going to become a private road or not. We are, but we're eliminating the access to that law. The private road doesn't exist. That's correct. Then there's no access to the law. Then you can't allow the boundary line adjustment. That's kind of where I'm at. That's my opinion. I mean, it's just conditioned. So it would be conditional upon the select board for all the town road. But it strikes me that the applicants have met that requirement. They have got it right. They provide testimony that beats the private road standards. It would be my recommendation assuming that I get this language that the select board approves this private road. It would be contingent on there. Correct. So we can make a decision. Right. Are there any questions with regard to the boundary line adjustment other than the access, which we would beat to death? I have not. You ready for the comments you want to make? Tommy. Welcome to Berlin. What? Welcome to Berlin. Steve's from Berlin. Right. In that case, I retain a motion to approve this application. To close. Not to approve the application. Thank you. I'll move to close application 18-054. Thank you for that clarification. Second. Discussion? All those in favor of that motion, please stand by by saying aye. Aye. Closing this hearing. Not to approve the application. Can you get in your language? Yep. Thank you very much. Thank you. Tom, did you get this? No. Do you want copies? Steve, did you want that back? I made a copy. You guys have got copies. I'd like to see it copied that time. Sandy and tell her not to rush back for me. Yeah, right. I think Kristi needs to copy that so she can sign it. Of course, the 45 days. Okay. Thanks. Am I next? I'm very glad that they did it for me here without me. I was at another meeting and all of a sudden I went longer than I thought. I looked at my watch and said, oh my goodness, that's supposed to be up in Berlin. Pretty easy to look tonight. Yeah. I see. Copy that for us. We have minutes of our last meeting. Which I've already misplaced. We'll find it. Thank you very much. I'm going to throw it away if he gets it tonight. Do you ever have comments with regard to the minutes of the meeting of September 4th? I do. I do. I've already shared these with Kristi. But basically, clarification at the area that we were talking about which is zone 12, is zone commercial. It's not zone industrial. And that the discussion with regard to setbacks could be greatly simplified by just saying that there's existing building and there's no change in setbacks. And there were a couple other editorial things. Did you understand what I said to you Kristi? I believe so. I don't think I understand your number. In other words, they'll plan to add two existing, add any additional lighting. This is going to be existing. Just so I had to work two. And that missable services no impact. It's because of the state highway. It's really, it was broader than that. There were no municipal impacts based on the testimony by Tom. And those one, two, three, four changes. Edits. So I'd like to move to amend the draft minutes of those edits. Discussion? All in favor of that? You see if I'm missing. All right. So what other general, did everyone get a notice on the fall planning and zoning forum recently? Yeah. It's scheduled for October 10th. Well that's the deadline. October 20th, I think it's the deadline for registrations of 10th. It's on October 17th. Okay. Local regulation of working around planning for vibrancy. If you didn't get it, I'll just I'll be in southern New Hampshire all that way. Signs. What? Signs. Maybe I should go to this. They're always, they're always, they're pretty good talks. Signs, signs, everywhere signs. Here's your sign. I can take it with them. Sure. I guess I'm assuming everybody's getting this stuff. I actually had copies of these for everybody, but somebody threw them away here at this office. Dana, how could you do that? That came from the league, right? You guys on the league's mailing list? I don't think so. It really should be. The newsletter is, of course, very interesting. Because every newsletter they have usually has an opinion, legal opinion on provisions of zoning or bylaws. So it's a pretty useful document. She was interested. It's typically more written for account administrators than it is for zoning. It's very much about zoning and planning. What are the website and register? Right. Just go to the website and register. Yeah. There's no cost to being on their website. We'll pay for the participation. We do have money in the budget to tend some of these. I do not plan on attending it. Neither do I. I might think about it. Because I'll be in Colorado. I'll be further away. Really? I wish I could travel. So, that's all I had. Anybody have any other matters of business before the board tonight? I'll entertain a motion and then we'll go into the little reception.