 Just running through the list here to see who is. Yes, Tom just joined. Excellent. Sure, you better turn around. There's a 10 pointer right behind you. Give me a minute. I got to jump on to working for a second. That's in Woodstock. That's a Scotney in the background. So as far as we know, everyone's who was playing as a bee that we knew about. I might lose you. I keep getting a message, bad quality network. So I'll come back if I have to. Yeah, I got the same message, so. I'll start my recording. I have, yeah, I don't have the text. I can also share it, Dusty. OK. OK. November 12, 2020. And I'm starting the recording. November 12, 2020 Planning Commission meeting, 632. And there is your script, Dusty. You have to read the whole thing. Dusty, you're muted. There we go. Oh, that was beautiful because I was messing up the words. I, Dustin Brousseau, as chair of the Essex Planning Commission, find that due to the state of emergency declared by Governor Scott as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and pursuant to Addendum 6 to executive order 01-20 and Act 92, this public body is authorized to meet electronically. In accordance with Act 92, there is no physical location to observe and listen contemporaneously to this meeting. However, in accordance with the temporary amendments to the open meeting law, I confirm that we are, A, providing public access to the meeting via videoconference with additional access offered through telephone. We are using Microsoft Teams for this remote meeting. All members of the Planning Commission have the ability to communicate contemporaneously. During this meeting through Teams and the public has access to contemporaneously listen and if desired, participate in this meeting. Planning staff will provide instructions for public participation using Teams before the hearings are opened. B, providing public notice of instructions for accessing the meeting. We previously gave notice to the public of the necessary information for accessing this meeting, including how to access the meeting on Teams with a computer, smartphone, or regular telephone in our posted meeting agenda. Instructions have also been provided on the town website at www.essex.org slash agenda center. Click on your government, then agendas and minutes and navigate to the desired meeting date. You scroll up. C, providing a mechanism for the public to alert the body, providing a mechanism for the public to alert the public body during the meeting if there are problems with access. If anyone has a problem, please use the chat feature within Teams, which is ALT-H, email or call OISO at 878-1343 or email at omacucuatessex.org. And D, continuing the meeting if necessary. In the event the public is unable to access this meeting, it will be continued to a time and place certain. Please note that all votes taken during this meeting that are not unanimous will be done by roll call vote in accordance with the law. So let's start by taking, start the meeting by taking a roll call attendance of all PC members present. David Raphael present. John Mangan present. Ned Daley present. Joshua Knox present. Tom Ferland present. John Schumacher present. And Dustin Burso present. John Alden alternate present. Excellent. And I see that John Alden is in. In the house. So just as stating for the record, because we do have a full house tonight, John is in seating in his role as an alternate and will not be a voting member of the agenda items, but we will be queried for any straw polls or any other votes that we may take that are not part of an application. And I do will be including his input during participatory discussions. For all those that are present in the listening audience, I will ask you to take the oath that we ask you to swear by this evening. And if you, well, we'll try to keep track of who comes in after the fact. So for all of you that are participating, do you swear that any testimony you present this evening will be truthful to the best of your abilities? Yes. I'm gonna take that as a yes across the board. So the first item on our agenda is public comments. This is a section for anyone in the public. Oh, and please, if you have a question, we'll raise your hand when we get to the point. Patty, I see that your hand is raised, but I'll hold on for a second. Look for your head. I will go by raised hands and staff will help me keep track of folks. We sometimes lose people when questions are in the chat window and the hands raised. So be patient with us, please. At this point, I'm looking for public comment for any items that are not on the agenda. And Patty, you have your hand raised. Yes, I just want to say that for two full years that I came and sat in your meetings and John Alden, I don't know you well, but you came towards the tail end. I have to, I absolutely have to give you guys absolute credit and admiration for how organized and how you implemented and not only you, but the steering committee, all the staff, Sharon and Mark, the two SE consultants that I got to meet. Dana Hanley, who I used to offer to come spend the night when there was a snowstorm, but she's no longer with us. I have not yet met Oisa, but I want you guys to know that you are critical to this town. You are what makes the town of Essex and the town of Essex Junction. That's why John Alden, you are incredible. You are so awesome to have on our board, whether you're an alternate or not. I just want to thank you all for everything you've done with the ETC plan and the implementation table on page 81. It's just awesome. Congratulations to all of you. That's it. Thank you for the board, for everybody that's worked on it. Thank you, your comments are appreciated. Thank you. You're welcome. Is there anyone else that would like to offer comment? Darren. I just want to remind folks who maybe don't know how to use Teams. If you're looking to raise your hand, there is a button in the top or possibly the bottom of your screen that's a little raise hand function or a little raise hand icon. That's how you would do that. If you're unable to do that or you can't find it, feel free to use the chat alt H. If you're on a phone, feel free to just speak up when there's a gap and the chair will call on you. How do you take the hand down? Sorry. Just click it again. Okay, thanks. Okay. So. Darren, your comments were not nearly as glowing as patties. All right. As we are ready to rock and roll here. First item on our agenda is the final subdivision, final subdivision public hearing, where Kathy PQ, this is a proposal for a four lot, five unit residential subdivision located at 84 Susie Wilson Road. Darren, who from staff is presenting on this? I will be presenting on this. So this is an application that has been before you several times in various forms. This is now a final subdivision last stage. All the ducks are pretty much in a row. The biggest discussion from the last meeting was a question about whether sidewalks were going to be needed and how they were going to be designed for this project. The applicants opted to do a full sidewalk along the west side of Susie Wilson Road, providing access to both curb cuts, both driveways. And that has met the satisfaction of staff. There was one minor outstanding issue with the stormwater design. I will pull up the plan so I can point this out. And just for folks in the audience for reference as well, this project is located on the old Susie Wilson Road. If you were to go up Susie Wilson from Route 15 at the Kellogg intersection and take a right at that weird intersection and go all the way down, this is on the left. And so you get to the plan here. These are the four lots that will be proposed. Well, lot one is existing. Lot two is a duplex. Lots three and four, each single unit dwellings. So back to stormwater. There is drainage along both of the driveways and along Susie Wilson Road. And there are dry wells at the end of each driveway, each proposed driveway, the whole stormwater. Darren, let me interrupt you. Is your maps, are you displaying maps and are they available, can people see them? I am displaying maps, but it looks like that is not working. I can't see them right now either. I was just going to say. How's that? Is that better? Nope. No, no, just blank screen. There we go, there we go. Thanks, Darren. One more interruption. Yeah, one more interruption. Dina, are you on as well? It's so, I'd like to have one of you guys or somebody can keep track of the chat window for questions. I'm on an older system and I either see the people with a hand raised or I see the chat window. I can't watch both easily. Sounds good. Thank you. Go ahead, Darren, sorry for the interruption. Thanks, no, I'm glad you said something. So, four lots of division, five units total, one existing. The duplex is here on lot two, lots three and four, each has a single unit dwelling. And the stormwater drainage, as I said, comes off each driveway and at the end of each driveway there is a dry well that will hold the stormwater temporarily in a storm event so it doesn't go washing into Indianbrook. At the end of lot four towards the end of the driveway, the dry well was partially within the town right of way. So you can see here, this is Susie Wilson Road. This is the property line, it was over that line. Public Works asked that either the dry well be moved out of the right of way or the applicant provided easement to the town to maintain that dry well and make it part of our stormwater system. And I believe the applicant has opted for the ladder to make it part of the town system and provide the easement. So that is included in the conditions of approval. And I'll let the applicant speak to that as well. I do wanna also note, as you always find after something is finished, there is an error in the staff report. The first line says 84 Susie Wilson Road planning and development. This is final subdivision. It's a conventional subdivision that was left over from a previous version. That is all I have from staff comments. We're supportive of the project and look forward to seeing it built. Are there, oops, not on mute, where'd I go? There we go. Sorry folks, like I said, old system tonight. So I'm bouncing between screens here. Anybody have any questions for staff at this stage? All right, Jeremy, are you presenting for the applicant side of things? Yes, I am. Thank you very much. Jeremy Mitowski with Trudell Consulting Engineers. Probably recall, I presented this previously with Colin Johnson. He has a hearing tonight in Westford, so he can't join us. But he's the one that did all the hard work on this and I just get all the credit. So, yep, as Darren said, I've taken a look through the staff report and we've tried to work through everything to satisfy the final plat requirements. And the only couple little things I've found, I'm embarrassed I didn't find that typo that Darren just talked about in the title, but I guess that's what he's there for. And then at the end, when we look at the conditions of approval, I just have one request for the board to maybe help me clarify something on this sidewalk. Condition number 20 reads, the sidewalk connection from A Bayer Avenue shall meet the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Existing sidewalks along this route shall be upgraded. I think that's a carryover from the other project, the Bufard project, because we're not connecting to the A Bayer Avenue sidewalk. If you recall at the site visit, the sidewalk for this project is right at Jean Richard's house, right at the same, almost right to the property line for this project. And we're just gonna be extending that along the PQ property frontage. And then in terms of ADA, we'd love to comply with that if we can, but I think the grade of Susie Wilson Road might be more than is allowed under the ADA. So I was proposing that maybe we could change that to be something along the lines of build the sidewalk in accordance with the property, with the plans. Is that it Jeremy? Just those? That was it. I read all the other conditions are perfect. Okay. Darren, do you have a staff response to the question about the sidewalks where we had to, we had just a misinterpretation or we have a difference in it? So the, it's left A Bayer out in there because it does technically connect from A Bayer. It doesn't have to stay that way. You can just say the stop connection or existing sidewalk connection. I would propose that the sidewalk be constructed with two public works specifications, just to make sure that there is a standard to it. And not that the plans are, not that the plans are inconsistent. There are two public work standards from what we understand, just in case there's an issue down the road. No, I'm happy to be happy with that side of the grade. Okay. All right. Let's go around the board with the commissioners before we open the public hearing on this. Let's start from the bottom of my list and go up. John Alden, any thoughts? You're muted. Well, I remember a delightful walk through the property. What is it? This past summer, maybe spring. I'm pleased with the way the final project has fit into the landscape and I have no further comments on what's been going on. I think it's great. Thank you. Tom, you're joining us. All right, thanks. Ned? Yeah, I'd sort of double up on what John just said. I think they've come a long way from what was initially proposed on this piece of property and I think it done a good job and we finally got something that I think could be a real plus. Thank you. Shu, where do you stand or sit? Yeah, I guess I'm sitting. I would say I did owe to the comments. I was not a huge participant in this particular application but I wanted to say to Colin and Jeremy and to Dell engineers that their patience and thoroughness through this process has been actually exactly the way we like to see things go where they are very reactive to our comments and we are also reactive to theirs and what they need. And it really, to me it seems like it went exactly like the way you really want an application to work in the town and with an applicant. So kudos to everybody all around the planning commission and to Dell engineering. I appreciate that. David. Oh, wait a minute. Hang on, wait a minute. I'm going out of order. I apologize. You're a little higher on the list than Mr. Mangan. I can't get out of order, I'm sorry. Did owe to other comments. I'm also at no additional questions. That was easy. I'm sorry, David, go ahead. Did owe to Mr. Mangan's comments. Josh. Did owe to all the diddows. This is exactly how the process, excuse me, how the process should go. I'm very pleased with this. So this is a ditto app. And I would echo what's been said as well. And I would say, Jeremy, I do appreciate the responsiveness that you've shown. And I use that word because it shows that you listened to us and you worked with us. And it was a very positive, collaborative effort. With that, I think we need to open the public hearing. I make a motion. We open the public hearing. Moved by Josh, seconded by. Shoe says second. Seconded by shoe. All those in favor. Aye. Aye. Opposed. Motion is approved unanimously. Public hearing is open. So at this point, if there's anyone in the audience that would like to offer comment or ask questions about this, please either raise your hand with teams or put a note in the chat window. And Dina is watching that for me and I'm watching the hand. So I'm not seeing any responses and. Okay, Rafael motion to close the public hearing. Seconded by shoe. Moved by David, seconded by shoe. All those in favor. Aye. Aye. Opposed. Motion carries, unanimous. At this point, the public hearing is closed. Is anyone in the commission willing or ready to make a motion on this? Ned, did you just say yes? Excellent. Go for it. I will make a motion. I move that we approve the final subdivision plan for Cathy Pecu for the proposal of a four lot, five unit residential subdivision on a 10.5 acre lot, located 84 Susie Wilson Road as presented. And the only condition that we would change is that item number 20 and the conditions to be modified to say that the sidewalks will be constructed to conform to all the current existing public works requirements. Rafael with a second with one friendly amendment, page five of 14 on the district dimensional requirements, first column, that should read required offsite water or sewer, not and sewer, different dimensions if you go and versus or, you know, it's a small thing but drops to 20,000 square feet, nothing that matters. Line number, David. Oh geez, line number. I don't have line numbers on my one set right after 172. Oh, okay. Yeah, sorry. That should just be a required offsite water or sewer. And we captured the correction that you, the grammatical correction, Darren that you brought forth, the titling. I don't believe that was in the motion. Yeah. The motion has subdivision, not a planned unit. Okay. Agreed on the second. So in motion, we have a second. Do we have any additional discussion on it? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries seven zero. Jeremy, you're good. Thank you very much to all of you. I really appreciate the comments and the process too that was, I remember the first night, it was a little, it was a little rocky. So I'm pretty happy that we were able to work with you guys and staff and the board and everyone. So thank you very much for all your time. And we look forward to the next project. Nice job. Congrats. All right. Thank you. See you later. Okay. So at this point, we are now looking to move into the discussion on the ETC next. So, Aliso and Darren, maybe if you guys could just give us a quick overview and orient us as to what we're looking at tonight. And I, Aliso, I saw that you'd send another email out, but I quite frankly, I didn't have a chance to read it. So I'm not sure what you, what was said to us, but I'd like to, I know we were anticipating this being the final draft from the consultants and based on the drafts that we've seen prior to this, we've, I felt, and I think the commission agreed that we needed to look at this before we decided to move it on. So at this stage, unless somebody in the commission has a direct question, I'm going to ask Darren and Aliso to lay the groundwork for us. Okay. So I think Darren can lay out the history better than I can, but this was a process that started many years ago. And again, Darren can speak to that, but I've been involved for the past eight months or so and we have looked at the document that was presented to us. And after getting to know more about the needs of the planning commission and understanding more about the Essex ordinance and seeing projects reviewed, I added my input to Darren's and we revised the Essex Town Center of Next Plan to be more streamlined and to be more focused. If I can use, if that word makes sense, we think that by changing the format, it actually focused the information in a way that made it more clear to people. And again, just reorganized the information, streamlined things. And that's what you have both and updated some of the images and that's what you have before you. The email that I sent to everyone earlier was a mistake that I caught when I was reading through it. As you know, we're all proof reading this and getting final comments. And one of the things that I noticed was that the key vision points that laid out a lot of the architectural vision on page 18 were not how we had revised them. And so that's what I sent around to all of you to bring it to your attention. And Darren actually has the corrected version to put up tonight on his screen so that we can all look at it and comment if need be. So Darren, do you have any other comments or wanna make a statement? Am I sharing that now? Oh, I was just gonna say I'm sharing that now. I wanna make sure everyone can see it. I'm hearing nothing. So I hope that means everyone can see the key policies to achieve. It's visible. Okay, great. Yep. And I will also say we don't need to rehash the past. It's been many years working on this, but we're, staff is very happy with, as we said, the changes to make our user friendly. And we do wanna very much emphasize the importance of this particular box and making sure that it not only have a language that we want in there to talk about the goals for this, but also that it gets included in the final document. We do also have a number of other more minor corrections to make from what the consultant's final layout gave us. But overall, they did a great job of accommodating in the changes we had to make. And we really appreciate their help doing that layout. So I'll leave this up so we can run through the key policies and then I'll suggest we go over the corrections that staff had and I just asked us to any changes from planning commission and the public. Okay, before we start running through stuff, I'd like to ask the commissioners, does anyone have specific comments that they'd like to call out or any thoughts or impressions where we have Darren and we still lead us through what they've got, what the changes are? Josh, how about you? Yeah, I really appreciate the time and effort that went into making this document our own. I'm gonna say it for probably the 50th time, but seeing better connected and more cohesive bolded just makes me so happy every time I see it. Because I mean, that's the whole thing. And that was the issue as you know with me for, I guess, going on a year now that that wasn't brought to the front. And so when I see that, that's just emblematic of how much more I like this document. And I think I've also said I love the policy points that are sprinkled throughout. I like what we have on page 18. I don't wanna go into too many specifics, but just generally very positive. And I like where this final draft has landed. Excellent, how does Everett feel about this? Everett is watching Wild Crats right now, but he was very positive about it. He did some of the hiking of the Matthewtown forest. So he's on board. David, any thoughts from your, John, I'll get to you. David, any thoughts? David Raffio. Unmute, David. Yeah, sorry. Can you hear me? Yeah. Can you hear me? Sorry, my damn controls. I'm good. I too had the same reaction to Josh's comments. I like that the message was carried through lots of work here by a lot of people. And you can definitely, the product is great. Oh, thank you. Excellent. John Mangan. Yeah, I have just a few minor feedback, comments. I'm paid just two to four. I would just offer up to five. It shows your full name. What's that? That's my full name. Somebody just came on as guest. If you're on, if you could mute yourself, please. Okay, there we go. Anyway, I would just offer that we consider moving the credits to the end of the document. I just feel like the general public really doesn't want to see that as the first thing they're reading. And just throwing that out there. The other thing is I thought Ned was part of the steering committee. Was that not true? Because he wasn't listed. Yeah, that was true. I was on the steering committee. Yeah. It's been so long, I've forgotten that. Yeah. Ned who? Yeah, that was a good one. A couple other things. Josh is David's listed as the vice chair instead of Josh on page two. Page six, better connected and more is bold, but it's missing cohesive. That's not bold. It seems like that's just a minor typo. We just want more. Yeah, right. Additionally, I mean, I'd like, you know, the there in other areas of the doc, there are the policy points have the big green box that, you know, really makes the policy point stand out. I almost feel like the better connected more but he's that box somewhere. Again, just throwing that out there for consideration. There's another, I think, yeah, page six as well. There's a sentence that's bold after the better connected and more one that says an ETC that emphasizes and that's in bold that I'm not quite sure why it doesn't really make sense to me why that's bold. And then finally, adding page numbers to the entire doc. I assume that was going to be done. It just hasn't been done because the document is draft. And you may want to consider even adding the, you know, something that says ETC next, Python better connected more cohesive to the bottom left footer of every page. Just to really drive that point home. So that's it. That's my feedback. For the record, John Mengen, I was vice chair when this damn project started. Yeah, I know, I know. Yes, that's true. But I also want to add that overall, and I mentioned this to staff, I think it looks fantastic. It really is nice. It's a nice looking document. Now it reads really easy. So it'd come a long way. Excellent. Thank you, John. Chu, you're muted. Yeah. It takes me a while to get the mouse up there to the mute button. Yeah, thanks, John, for those edits. That's good. And Ditto to David, Josh's comments. It's a great looking document. And I agree with John and we should drive the point home down in the footer there. It's a great idea. That's all I got. Wow, cool. John Alden. I will echo all of the things that have been said, but maybe it's, I'm not sure maybe it's how it's just loaded, but it's still driving me absolutely crazy that it scrolls vertically. You can't get the pages that are in a book form would be opposite and intended to show across as a full page, you know, a double page. Don't show up that way because it's driving me crazy. So if we can solve that, so maybe you can view it on your, whatever browser you're in in a two-page format, I'm 100% behind it. Okay. Ned. Thanks. I like the document. I appreciate the work that everyone's done, including the consultants, because I think you look back, has not been a very happy road for them for trying to get this finished for whatever reason. I think the document itself without getting too specific represents a good vision of where we want to go in that area, but I think it's only the beginning of the work that we have to do. One of my initial thoughts, and if you guys got 10 minutes, I'll give you a couple of them. So some of my initial thoughts deal with what we end up with in the town center area, concerning mobility, transportation and all. And that is right now so tied, I think to the economic uncertainty that we're looking at here, that down the road, it may or may not change, some of the enhancements would sound... Ned, somebody's got something going. Okay, go ahead. I think some of the residential upgrades and increases in density are necessary to be able to sustain some of the other items, the bad, different communities. On a whole, I think I feel really comfortable going forward. And I think that the task before us, after it gets accepted, is going to be just as busy as we try to put the rest of this, we haven't really put the red hybrid zoning, things like that. And the only other thing I have to say is the infrastructure section is a little thick, but it has to be there. I looked at it, it says everything that we need. I think part of it is a key to being able to go forward with this. And I think this is a key element that we need to keep watch on between the town center plan, public works and the select board. That's it for now. Thanks, Ned. Tom, you got to miss a lot of this back and forth, so... I did. So coming back to it at the end, it looks pretty nice. So I don't have any substantial comments. Other than that. Darin, you're going to be next, but I think if we get back to it, somebody who ever keeps jumping in here has got a lot of noise. Darin, if we're going to go back to potentially updating titles and so forth on the contributors page, we need to add Oviso. She is the Community Development Director and she has been working on this for the last eight months. So we don't necessarily have to remove anybody, but we do have to make sure she's there. Okay. You had your hand raised for a long time. Very patiently. Thank you. You're up. Sorry. I was raising my hand just to put myself in line to speak. Wasn't trying to interrupt. And we did notice one of the first things is that Oviso was not included in the list of folks who worked on this. That was one of our first corrections. And I just also want to know for John's, John Alden's comment about viewing it on two pages. I'm not sure that there is a way to do that automatically because it's about the viewer and the user's view settings rather than something you can cook into the document, but we will check with the consultants to see if there's a way to make that a default when it's viewed. Sharon, you had a question. I have somebody joined with a phone number 617, but unfortunately it's blocked from me right now and I just was looking to identify who that was for the record and also maybe tell them that they don't have their microphone muted. Okay. So 0607-435-0623. Sharon, that's noted. That's Jim Berniger. I am late. I apologize. I had not turned off my audio. So it is done. I will do it as soon as I'm finished speaking. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Okay. I'm not looking to go to the public quite yet. Patty, I see that you're there and I'll roll to you in a minute or two. Darren, did you want to go through and sort of call out some of the high level changes or any, based on the comments from the commissioners? Oh, and I'm myself in support of the work and the effort at this stage. So do you want to go through and call out any of the high level or hot topics or, you know, big wins that we may have gotten out of this? Thanks, Dusty. I will actually pass it over to Aliso to talk about the key policies to achieve the vision. If that is okay with you, Aliso? Sure. Great. And I will put that up on the screen so everyone can see the version that we want to be in the document. All right. Can everyone see that? The biggest changes that we made to this block were just to streamline some of the comments. Some of the information as it was presented before weren't actually policies. They were just comments. And so that resulted in the initial paragraph. But then we, from the comments that we'd heard from you over a period of months, we tried to incorporate, we tried to touch on the aspects, especially of architectural elements that sort of, from a general perspective, would help improve the level or the quality of architecture that we got in the ETC. And so without being specific about things, we just sort of added these suggestions and tried to look at the future development to look at all of this. Bringing is just throwing me off a little bit. But yeah, we just looked at the language to try to give a broad stroke brush of what it was that we needed from architectural proposals moving forward. And we hope that you agree with comments that we've made. Darren, can you go ahead and mute the two unmuted attendees? Yes, I have muted. There's a person just as a guest in parentheses. There's a person who's just named guest in parentheses. You keep unmuting yourself and creating a lot of feedback. We'd really appreciate it if you would stop doing that. Thank you very much. And generally speaking, a lot of the changes that we made were really to lay the foundation for future zoning changes and policy and just different policy attitudes that we knew needed to be addressed in different documents moving forward. Understanding that this is the foundational document for a lot of the changes that will be made in the future. Is there any component, since we're bouncing around, is there any component that staff feels is less than polished right now today? And I'll let you guys decide what less than polished means. Well, I think we're, I mean, certainly everyone else on the team can give their input, but I think we addressed a lot of the major, well, all of the issues that we had, everything that we identified, we addressed. The images are more Essex centered. Instead of looking to other communities for good examples, we looked to Essex to highlight the good examples of what we've been doing. We tried to keep the maps more focused so that they'd be more meaningful for everyone. We tried to make the maps correspond with the content in a more direct one-to-one way. We tried to use visuals where we could and we tried to highlight, I think Darren and I both had a lot of fun with the policy points, just trying to highlight some of the bigger issues to call them out in a way that maybe were more attention-grabbing rather than hidden within the text. And I'll just let Darren and Sharon comment. I was going to say, based on the comments, I think you heard from the commissioners. I think you guys hit it. Sharon, did you have something you wanted to add to this? No, I was going to say, you know, we take our feedback from the planning commission. So I've heard positive things and that's pretty much my cue to stay quiet. Okay. I'm going to cycle through Evan. I see that you're on here. Did you want to offer any comment to the planning commission at this time? Hearing none. On you, Evan, if you're talking. Just that I'm proud of the staff and the plan commission working so well together. They heard you loud and clear and took their cues from you. And my review of the document was all positive. I like the final, almost final product. Thank you. And thank you, staff. Okay. I'm going to go through and we've got. Okay. Patty, you've got your hand raised. So I'm calling on you since that's the hand I see. Okay. I just, you know, I love everything, but I'm being a little picky. I want to know how the critical infrastructure that you're going to need to make these improvements are going to happen to push this incredible vision plan to become a reality. I feel that the, the building blocks of. The vision plan, which I adore is the infrastructure. And I'm worried that that may be a roadblock trying to get the select board to approve this. That's my two cents. Okay. Thank you. Let's see. I'm trying to switch back to the people. Okay. Put your hand down if you can, when you're done. I'm trying to touch it. Ned, did you want to add something? I want to talk to people individually when. Questions like that. I want to usually go through if I see a bunch of hands, let's get a bunch of questions out and then we can. Back and forth unless you want to, if you want to jump onto that one thing that that would be fine. Yes, that so. One of the last things that we did was. Submit was resubmit these chapters to public works to parks to, you know, to review water to review road to make sure that everything was current. And so. We all approach this as. This plan as an as a foundational document, which just sort of lays out the vision. And so it being in the vision make makes it that much easier to implement in terms of receiving grants, receiving grant funding to realize the projects to actually like make these things happen. And so. Everything that's in here isn't funded. It's just part of the vision. Thank you. Ned, you did your hand raised. You're on mute. Yes, I did. And if we're talking about infrastructure, maybe Evan can give us an update on where. The sewer and water project stand. Thank you. Go for it, Evan. You're willing. Well, I don't exactly know where they all stand, but we are putting together our capital improvement. Plan update. And so I would leave that to Dennis to give a fuller picture maybe at your next meeting. But one of the things we want to do as, as others have noted to make this vision come true. In the future, it is going to need. Infrastructure upgrade. And. We have to look at it. We also have partners. Champlain water. Is our water provider. And our treatment plant. So with that, I would actually ask that you request. Dennis come to your next meeting. Okay. Walter Clements, you had your hand raised. You're still on mute. So if you have any, if you'd like to. You can take yourself off mute. Okay. Since Walter can't seem to get to us, are you there, Walter? Do we have anybody, Dina? Do we have anybody in the chat window is asking any questions? Nope. Nothing right now. Let's see. Nope. Oh. Well, he responded, but he just said, Walter. From that, did he have comments or did, is that. Okay. I don't see any more Sharon, your hand is raised. Sorry. That's okay. This is the time to ask questions. Anybody else commissioners. At this point. Do you feel comfortable directing staff to prepare this to go to the select board? I guess that's the direct question. If I, if there's another question we should be asking somebody else throw it in there, but I'm, I'm feeling at this point in time. We're waiting for. Walter, are you back? I don't want to, I don't want to lose you. I see your hand raised, but you're on mute. And I see myself. In your computer. And you're playing a game. All right, Walter, I'm going to have to assume that, that, that you don't have an active question for us. He said no in the chat. Okay. My feeling at this point is that our question before the commission is, are we ready to push this up to the select board for their review and engage with them directly on this? That's, that's what I think is the question. Darren, are we so should we be asking a different one at this stage? That sounds reasonable to me. Same here. I will say, you know, we do have some very minor corrections to put in there, mostly to do with typos and making the layout right. And John Alden made another point about removing some extra white space. But if you are supportive of the document in general with all these minor corrections, I would agree we should, would feel ready to bring into the select board after those edits. Commissioners, what do you feel at this point, based on what we've seen in front of us, do you feel that we are sufficiently edited to be able to, to allow staff to do the grammaticals and the minor updates that Darren just referenced and allow them to work to get this on to the select board's agenda? Shoe here. I'm not sure how much more we could add at this point. I think it's, I think it's ready to go. A little more polish and off it goes. Ditto. John Mangan, I'm good with it as well. I already gave my feedback, which is pretty straightforward and I really don't need to see the correction because it's easy. Okay. John Alden. I think it's awesome overall. I'm just, I'm stunned at how much easier it is to kind of follow along with the text and the graphics from where we started. So I couldn't be happier. And I think the only couple of comments that are kicking around out there are just very fine brush things. So I'm fine moving it forward. Ned. Excellent. Thanks, John. I definitely think we should move it on. As I said, it's a good vision. There's not a lot that people in general will find any fault with because it is pretty progressive. The specifics are going to have to come later, but we need, I think we need to get it started with the select board. They're not going to read it once and have no questions and say, yeah, let's adopt it. So let's get it started and see what happens. Excellent. David, how are you feeling about it right now based on the journey so far? And you're on mute again. I bet you're saying a lot and it's probably very eloquent. We'll roll back to you in a minute. Josh. I agree that it's really just a matter of grammatical finesse at this point. I think that's a really good document. And I think we should send it to select board and let staff deal with those little grammaticals and typos and what have you. I think this, this should go to the select board. Okay. David, back to you. Are you on board with it? Yeah. All the other comments made. Regardless of the journey. I think where we are. I just lost something. Okay. Did we lose David or did we lose? Okay. That is with the audio tonight. Can you hear me? I can hear you now. All right. I'm good. Okay. Sorry, David. I was trying to mute Walter Clemens. I may have accidentally muted you. Walter, please wait to return to unmute so that we can hear everybody in turn. Thank you. Okay. So I think we've got the commission at this point is in favor of moving this forward. So I'd like to actually ask for a motion. And then this is not regarding an application. I'm actually John Alden. I would like you to participate in this. Since this is, this is more of a directional and not a, not a official application. But I would like. Josh, if you could put forth a motion to move this forward to the select board. Yes, I move that we move. The ETC master plan. As brilliantly assembled by staff to the select board for their review and commentary. I'll second it. This issue. All right. All those into any additional comment. I'm not sure what to say. I just want to get back to the comment. I'm the commission. One question. Are we sending it for their approval or just review? This is forwarding it to them. To do with it as they need. So a good, good question, Mark, but I think. Actually, you made me just think about that. Darren, at this stage, we're looking for the select board to do what with this document. Or are we so. That's an excellent question. And Greg Duggan is on so he can. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that. The consultant is going to make the final. Presentation to the select board and that the select board will then adopt it. Or not. Or send it back to us for changes. That is the plan. And I do want to toss in the kudos to staff and praise to the staff for the work they've done on ETC and the planning commission as well. So really appreciate the many hours and hard work you've all put into this. Sounds like it'll probably be forwarded tonight to the select board. I can work with a we so and Darren and Sharon and Dean and tomorrow to get a copy to the select board in the reading file. Potentially as early as next week so they can take a look at it and start digesting it. If I remember correctly, the contract a we so is right. The consultant has one more presentation to the select board and we can schedule that. My guess is that it might take a meeting or two to give the select board a chance to ask questions and fully understand it. But hopefully they can move forward with approval in the near future. So to Tom's specific question what we're looking for we need to modify the motion to forward this to the select board for review and adoption. Is that correct? We don't we don't want them just to review it or are we just looking to forward this to select board and and Greg to allow the select board to determine. The select board excuse me the select board will ultimately be asked to what they will be asked to adopt the plan so they will ultimately do so. So I think I think Tom your question about whether we can just review it or adopt it. It's it's it probably doesn't make a lot of difference because they're going to decide what they're going to do with it when they get there. But Josh it would maybe be good if you could revise your motion to review to include the word adopt. Yes. I meant my review my motion to say forward to the select board for their review and adoption. I'm good with a amendment. Okay. So we have a motion moved amended moved again. I'm not sure the right terminology but I think we have a motion on the table to forward this to the select board for review and adoption. Any additional discussion on that. All those in favor think if I by saying hi. Hi. Hi. Okay. Any nays that we have motion is approved eight zero. And we're including our alternate in that count because the alternate was an active participant in this. Greg Evan Sharon. We so Aaron. Thank you very much. Is there anything I think it would be good if you know we the consultants will be presenting on this as well they should. But it would be also be good to make sure that we have representation of the planning commission. And specifically I would like to make sure that we could try to include Josh and John Alden. If they're both available when these reviews going because they did a lot of heavy lifting from the planning commission side of the reviews. All of us should be there if we can. I would like to have at the minimum. John if you're able and willing and Josh if you're able and willing to to be there to supplement the consultants and to help respond to questions from the select board if there are any. That that have alternate views and so forth but again every commissioner should be able to be present. I think we're good after a couple of years. So I think the right term. What is it peace out. Is that the right word phrase. Where's the who's got a mic they can drop. Boom. All right I'm on to the next one. Drop your laptops. The minutes from October 8th. Find them. I move the minutes for October 8th. 2020. Second. Second. Tom Perlin second. Sure. Is anybody want to offer any comment to the minutes that Sharon the most recent ones that Sharon has submitted yesterday I think. Hearing no comments then. Those in favor of the minutes signify by saying aye. Aye aye. Opposed. And it's carry unanimous. Additional business. Bidness get any more business force. No bidness. None for me. Okay. of our votes, I can't get away with that a little political commentary, I would take a motion. If we have no additional business, I would take a motion to go away. I move adjourn. And shoe seconded. All those in favor. Raphael opposed. Raphael overruled. Nice try, David. 7 32 p.m. All right. Thanks everyone for attending. Good night, everybody. Bye bye. Good night. Good night.