Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02_03_21 Planning Board Meeting02032021.mp3 Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:00:00] ​Is that Rich and Joe, 6526? Board Member Rich Teeter ​[00:00:07] ​Yes, it is. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:00:09] ​Very good. So we got Michael, Ann, Henry, Rich OK, and myself and Aaron and Joe, so we've got the full complement of board members and alternates, I believe. [00:00:32] ​And so it's 7:01 I'll call the meeting to order. [00:00:39] ​okay. [00:00:41] ​First item on the agenda tonight was a review of the minutes from Jan. [00:00:47] ​The January meeting. [00:00:51] ​Has everyone had a chance to look at those? Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:00:54] ​Yes, I did. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:00:59] ​I didn't look at them. Sorry, I should have. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:01:04] ​OK. Does anyone have any comments, corrections? Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:01:22] ​Not me. Oh, I'm just looking at the minutes it says the board considered a glare analysis study and it may be waved... I just wonder when we made that decision. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:01:38] ​We're not going to wave it because I have a glare study. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:01:43] ​Done. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:01:45] ​And. I can send it to people if they want to see it. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:01:54] ​It was something about a conditional... Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:02:00] ​ what Pat were you saying something? Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:02:02] ​conditional, something conditional and in the contract or something that a glare study in the future might be appropriate... Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:02:12] ​I can't hear you very well, Patricia. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:02:14] ​OK, a glare study in the future might be appropriate. That was mentioned. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:02:21] ​You know, I've got we've got a glare study... Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:02:24] ​OK,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:02:25] ​We have one. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:02:28] ​OK, guys, I'm just dropping in for a minute to give you guys a guide to the documents. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:02:33] ​OK, Hi Ellen. Hello. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:02:37] ​Hi. Hi. Hi. Hello. Hi. So because there's so many documents on this project, they are all in on the document. They're in a folder on the laser Fische. Right. So that is linked from the announcement. So everything that I've been sent is in that folder, except I did put the resolution on the page of the announcement so that that's like very easy to access for people. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:03:07] ​OK. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:03:10] ​The resolution to approve the SEQR? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:03:12] ​That was the SEQR resolution, yes. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:03:15] ​Yes, I was sent a resolution by Dan. There may be some duplicates in the folder. So if anybody you know, I think that they're pretty clearly marked what the duplicates are. But I don't know if there's, like, subtle differences or whatever. You can look at the upload date. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:03:32] ​I'll check those and send you an email or can we can we put a mark on these someplace or. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:03:41] ​Yes just write down the title and then just email to me. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:03:44] ​I'll just email you. It looks like we have two copies of the FEAF, part one in there. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:03:52] ​Yeah, you had just sent it out, so I didn't know if it was an update Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:03:54] ​Yeah, I just had sent that out earlier and I just reset it with the part two and three just to make sure everybody had everything, you know, in one spot. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:04:06] ​I mean, later Fische is like an amazing resource that the Town is using more and more and functions, sort of like Dropbox. So I'm just hoping everybody can access it and that it's usable. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:04:18] ​Right. OK, so everyone understands where everything is or you have any questions for Ellen. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:04:35] ​Think I'm good? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:04:37] ​OK. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:04:41] ​Where's the resolution Dan for tonight? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:04:44] ​That would be great. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:04:45] ​Where is the resolution for tonight. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:04:47] ​For. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:04:49] ​Didn't get it. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:04:51] ​Yeah, I got it, I read it just a few minutes ago, but I'm trying to find it again. I've got so many different things. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:04:56] ​I it was in the email I sent out. I don't. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:04:59] ​Was it in the email on February 1st or the one at 1:16 pm today. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:05:03] ​The one at the today. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:05:05] ​OK,. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:05:06] ​Mine says 1:30 pm from Dan with the resolution in it. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:05:09] ​Yeah. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:05:11] ​And it would be #2 Dan. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:05:13] ​I had sent out the. The FEAF. Parts one, two and three earlier. Then I sent the resolution out a little bit later. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:05:27] ​OK, and then the resolution is also linked from the announcement. So right under the minutes and the transcript is the resolution. There's a link on the Townofenfield.org page. OK. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:05:39] ​Sounds good. Thank you. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:05:40] ​Thank you. You did a great job. Town Clerk Ellen Woods ​[00:05:42] ​Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Patricia. So Patricia is going to take it from here. Thank you so much, Patricia. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:05:48] ​Ok Thanks Ellen. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:05:51] ​Good night. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:05:54] ​OK. Hello, Dan. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[00:05:57] ​Hello. Sorry I was late, I was having a little Internet issue. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:06:00] ​That's OK. We're just going through the minutes from last. Last month, and there's someone who wanted to make a motion to approve the minutes? Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:06:16] ​All right, sure, I make a motion to approve the minutes from January 6th. Alternate Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:06:22] ​OK, I'll second the motion. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:06:27] ​Very good, very well. Yeah, and. All in favor, just say yes. [00:06:34] ​Yes,. [00:06:34] ​Yes,. [00:06:35] ​Yes,. [00:06:36] ​Yes,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:06:38] ​Any opposed? ... none, so minutes are approved. OK, the next item. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:06:51] ​I wondered if you wanted me to call the vote Dan? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:06:55] ​Oh she wants you to call the vote... Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:06:57] ​If you want me to, I will. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:06:59] ​ I don't think the minutes we're worried about that. So. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:07:01] ​Yeah, but if you have to vote on the resolution or anything,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:07:05] ​Right. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:07:07] ​Yes. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:07:07] ​Yes. If the resolution will need a vote and I'm going to be abstaining from voting at that. So, Aaron I'll appoint you as a voting member for purposes of the Norbut Solar Farm Project, due to a potential conflict of interest, which there really isn't any, but I just want to make everything clear here. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:07:31] ​So, yes, OK. Understand. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:07:34] ​OK. So that everyone. If everyone have a copy of the. FEAF, Part one. Accessible. [00:07:54] ​Yes,. [00:07:56] ​Yes,. [00:07:57] ​I have one. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:07:58] ​OK,. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:07:58] ​ If you Dan, will you? [00:08:03] ​I guess it might be beneficial to share your screen. [00:08:06] ​I can share the screen. I've got. [00:08:10] ​I'm going to share my screen with everybody. [00:08:21] ​OK. [00:08:25] ​So that's what I'm going to. Can everyone see that screen? [00:08:34] ​Yes,. [00:08:34] ​Yes. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:08:35] ​OK, now this could be interesting. So what I've got up to here is the part one. We've had this for quite a while. Did anyone have any questions on how they completed Part one? I think it's a good representation of the project. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:09:03] ​I guess I guess my one question is. In our role in the planning board, do we feel that we have the skill level of the knowledge level to be able to say that we are OK with this review and have enough? Are we enough to be approving it? Or do we need an outside entity that has skill in this area to give this to and to say we would like just a double check on this from someone? You know, we haven't really dealt with this issue yet, so,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:09:49] ​You know, normally I have a lot of experience. I don't want to sway the board one way or the other because of my connections with Labella. Who did complete this FEAF. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:10:12] ​I guess I would ask what specific concerns you might have Mike? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:10:17] ​Specific concerns are that if for some reason something on this part one, which is the main. Information source that we have in relation to the SEQR is questionable if it's if it's interpretive in such a way that it could have been interpreted one way or the other. And someone comes and says, well, you interpret it this way, but you shouldn't have or perhaps you shouldn't have interpreted it this way or that way, then... [00:10:46] ​I really, I have a lot of confidence in Dan and his understanding in doing this. On one level, I don't want anything to come back on Dan and have him have us, as the board say, well, we just took it for Dan's word that everything was OK and good. And then somebody say, oh, yeah, but Dan worked for Labella, of course, he's going to say that. I don't believe that to be true, but that that can happen in people and know it's one of those things where how far do you want to stretch liability and how far do you want to stretch other attitudes. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:11:22] ​If we can go through this line by line with the whole board looking at it? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:11:31] ​I guess that's the other part of it. How much line by line do we want to do different forms? Because it definitely has a lot, there's a lot of information. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:11:40] ​Well, let's just say the first page is, is the applicant information and. Everything that they have. Is the description of the project this straightforward? And I think the owners are straightforward, and the property owners are listed property, I believe. And that's probably not... And then the second page. Which is a pretty straight forward list of the approvals that are required in the first section. There is a, [00:12:32] ​They list the Town board as being a government entity involved because of the PILOT agreement. And then also that would also be the bonds and things... [00:12:50] ​The Town Planning Board does site plan approval and the solar permit, including SEQR. We do not have a zoning board. Or the other local agencies. [00:13:11] ​They don't have any jurisdiction here, I don't believe it, anyone else does. County agencies is the IDA with the pilot agreement and county planning does the 239 review. [00:13:25] ​State agencies, there was a consultation with SWPPP, the storm water pollution prevention plan and NYSERDA funding. And then you have this Army Corps of Engineers because of the potential of the wetlands on this site. Pretty sure we're not in a coastal area. And we don't have any designated inland waterways in the Town. Do we don't have local water for rehabilitation programs and we don't have a coastal erosion hazard area? I don't think there's a lot of questions there. And we're not adopting a local law. There is a comprehensive plan, so we have a land use plan. [00:14:24] ​And the comprehensive plan doesn't, as I don't believe the comprehensive plan has any specific recommendations for this area or these parcels. [00:14:43] ​And. [00:14:46] ​Item B. Local regional planning districts adopted Open municipal, a plan that it does list the Tompkins County Agricultural and farmland protection plan. [00:15:10] ​Zoning, we don't have zoning. This is allowed by the special approval, conditional use permit. And there's no zoning change because we don't have zoning. Ithaca. City School District, Tompkins County Sheriff's Department, the police agency, Enfield Volunteer Fire Company and the Robert H. Treman State Park in Bock-Harvey Forest Preserve. [00:15:46] ​A lot of these things come up when you go into the environmental planner. They automatically infill with the DEC website just for your information. On.... [00:16:05] ​Proposed potential development, the proposed project is approximately plus or minus ninety seven acres as the project area itself. [00:16:21] ​Total physical disturbance that the forty two acres comes from, I believe, mostly cutting, clearing some woodlands. And the area of the panels themselves is approximately 94 (ninety four) acres, 93.9 (ninety three point nine) acres, these are all shown on the site plans, too. So that's where they come from. It's not an expansion of an existing use. It will include a subdivision, which we haven't got the final, we haven't got those documents yet. So that's another approval that we have to go through in the future. [00:17:04] ​And. [00:17:07] ​Just listed there, it could be the before total lots that actually might be a 5 lot subdivision for this parcel because one lot would be subdivided off for Johnny's Wholesale. So, Aaron, have you done SEQR stuff also? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:17:33] ​I, not particularly, no,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:17:35] ​You're what your expertise is, structural or. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:17:39] ​Electrical,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:17:40] ​Electrical. OK, well, electrical would fit in with the well. When we get the electrical question, you can confirm that they know what they're talking about. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:17:49] ​Yeah, you seem to have done a pretty decent job and more... Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:18:01] ​It's a single phase project. They're not going to phase it in in three phases or four phases or anything. There's no residential uses. There is nonresidential construction. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:18:19] ​This is helpful, though, then I think you're doing a good job and it's a great idea to review section by section. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:18:27] ​Yeah. Line by line here. If anyone is objecting to... [00:18:31] ​They're not creating a lake or a pond. [00:18:39] ​Is it, there's no major excavation, mining or dredging in the area for the project, the only excavation would be for electrical trenches and stripping for the roads and the minimal structures they're putting in. [00:18:56] ​And so that item is basically if your principal use of that site is going to be for creating a gravel pit or moving a lot of it, for. Well, the host action caused a resulting alteration of an increase or decrease in size of any existing wetland. [00:19:36] ​They're basically putting some panels in the wetland area, which is allowed by the corps, because you're not putting fill into it yet. [00:19:47] ​Mike, you have a comment? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:19:49] ​No,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:19:50] ​OK? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:19:51] ​No. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:19:53] ​Your you're. [00:19:59] ​Oops, didn't want to do that. [00:20:01] ​Sorry,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:20:02] ​I don't just offhandedly I would, you know, I've actually I've gone through it, too. Line by line. [00:20:07] ​And there's nothing to me that stands out anywhere. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:20:11] ​Was there any specific thing that you would question how they answered the question? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:20:16] ​No, there wasn't that at all. Seemed pretty pretty just standard everyday stuff to me. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:20:21] ​OK? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:20:22] ​I was more to some degree and I am trying to think of the Town and that, and that's all it was. That's something I'm also trying to do. I'm trying to imagine your position Dan and to make sure that we don't put you in a vulnerable position. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:20:37] ​No, I'm not going to try to convince anybody one way or the other, and I'm not going to vote then. So I'm recusing myself from that. I'm just facilitating the meeting just because I have all the resources to do that. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:20:56] ​Yeah. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:21:00] ​And if someone else would rather run the meeting, and that's that's fine, too. I just. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:21:10] ​I don't I don't see anything at all in it that it's really, flags for me. I don't see any red flags anywhere. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:21:18] ​Yeah,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:21:19] ​I think the only thing, you know, not quite ready to do the resolution yet, but. But. When we get to the resolution, I have a couple of things that I would like to say in relation to that, but. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:21:33] ​That's fine. Let's let's do the next. You know, part one is the responsibility of the applicant. And I believe they have completed and done their due diligence for part one. So let's move ahead to part two, if that's all right with everybody. I'll go through. I'll just put that up on the screen. This is where the planning board has to answer questions. OK, just a little. [00:22:11] ​Primer on SEQR, you know, part two describes the lead agency's responsibilities. And how this form is completed. [00:22:28] ​And I sent sort of a draft that was partially filled out, out to everyone and, if, I'd like to go through it with the board and if anyone has any objections or disagrees with how this is filled out, I'm leaving it up to the board to tell me how to modify the form if they have a concern about it, if that's all right. Is that acceptable to everybody? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:23:02] ​That sounds great. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:23:03] ​OK. So as you're looking at this part 2 form. [00:23:14] ​The. First part is the impact on the land, and this is where you really need to have the part one accessible to be able to answer the questions, and... [00:23:36] ​So the impact on land based on Section SEAF Part one, Section D 1 that describes that you're putting something on the land basically so, yes, there is an impact on the land. And everyone in agreement with that? There's somebody who is not agreeing with that, just raise your hand or, you know, open your mike and say something. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:24:01] ​Yes, there is. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:24:03] ​OK, so there are unfortunately, I don't think I can share two screens at once. [00:24:19] ​This is the biggest, biggest problem with electronic stuff is that it's nice to have a paper copy in front of you if it refers back to something you're flipping between screens quite a bit. But I think everyone is familiar enough, I think, with the proposed project that if there's a question in your mind,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:24:42] ​I think page one is good. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:24:44] ​OK, anyone else have comments? Basically, we're saying that there is some impact, but the small impact, but it's a relatively small impact, is everyone in agreement with that? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:25:05] ​Yes,. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:25:06] ​Yes,. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:25:07] ​Yes. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:25:08] ​OK. [00:25:13] ​Part two, impact on geologic features, this refers to part one, E-2G, and I believe that was a no in the part one. It's modification or destruction of or inhibits access to any unique or unusual landforms in the area like cliffs, dunes, minerals, fossils, caves, and if someone is aware of something that wasn't picked up by the applicant or by us. I believe the answer to that would be no. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:25:56] ​I'm happy with part 2. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:25:58] ​Okay an impact on surface water. It may affect one or more wetlands or other surface water bodies. So the answer is yes, we're doing some changes to the land. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:26:16] ​But they're all small impacts, but they're all small impacts. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:26:20] ​Right, or no, they're not happening, they're not creating any water bodies. [00:26:23] ​All right. Is everyone good with that? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:26:26] ​Yes, I'm good. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:26:27] ​So anyone has a question. Please speak up. I think everyone's unmuted. [00:26:37] ​Impact on groundwater, water, we're not using new groundwater sources and we're not, it's not generating anything that's going to go into the groundwater, so the answer's no on that one. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:26:59] ​I think, as long as they build, be there, as long as they build in compliance with the solar law, then that would be a no. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:27:04] ​Right. [00:27:06] ​They're not going to be discharging things. Impact on flooding is not going to have an impact on the flooding. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:27:16] ​That's a no. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:27:18] ​Yeah. What's the next? [00:27:24] ​Impacts on air. It's not going to be a regulated air emission source. That's a no, that's that came out of part one,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:27:35] ​That's a no. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:27:38] ​Impact on plants and animals. Yes, it will change some. [00:27:47] ​By fencing areas off and changing some ground cover from woods to basically meadow vegetation. I believe there's no impact or small impact to any biological communities. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:28:12] ​The only issue there for me was it if they're willing to use agricultural plants rather than chain link fences, I think that's a better choice. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:28:22] ​Yes, that's that's where the aesthetic thing. But also it allows small mammals to get through, I suppose. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:28:29] ​Yeah, I think I think that matters. My mom lives on the other side of the fence and I can't get there, might matter to some little guy out there. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:28:49] ​We said it might impact agriculture resources that came from part one. There was a listing of impact. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:29:04] ​There are. A couple of soil groups three and four in the site. Those are a little bit more productive soils. I believe it's going to have a small impact. I felt it would have a small impact on that as we are taking potentially 40 or 50 acres out of agricultural production that are currently being farmed. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:29:37] ​I think it does. I think it does matter, though, that it's not necessarily a long term. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:29:42] ​No, it's definitely restorable. We're not, and we're still going to be growing vegetation on it, and if they utilize sheep for grazing, then it changes some of the patterns or... I know there's a lot of room around it, so there's other portions of the site that can still be accessed, so I felt that was a small impact on. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:30:18] ​Makes sense. What was our lifespan again with the. It was above the 25 years? I forget. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:30:25] ​Yeah, 25, 30 years, you know. That doesn't mean the that's the lifespan, estimated lifespan for the production of the panels, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't upgrade those as time goes on. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:30:43] ​I think if the land becomes more valuable for agriculture than for solar farms, that the market will tend to do something about that. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:30:53] ​Right. Right now, that land is being farmed, I believe. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:31:00] ​It is now yes,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:31:02] ​And I'm not sure who is doing the farming, but it isn't being fine. By the way, the property owners, I believe they're leasing it to someone else. Maybe they're using it for some hay. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:31:15] ​It had a bunch of corn on it last year. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:31:17] ​Yeah, I don't think the owners were raising the corn for their own purposes there. [00:31:27] ​It's not going to irreversibly convert the land. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:31:30] ​Yeah, well, it may even have some value in the end, because it sometimes is. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:31:36] ​Right. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:31:36] ​Can be beneficial. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:31:41] ​They bring in some animals, some sheep. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:31:50] ​So is anyone else having any other questions as far as it being a small impact or no impact? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:31:58] ​I think it's fine for the ag. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:31:59] ​Yeah, OK. [00:32:03] ​Impact on aesthetic, definitely it's going to be visible. And that was stated in part one. I don't believe it's actually visible from any historic resource. And I don't think there's a designated view in that area. I mean, looking at fields from the road is aesthetically pleasing and. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:32:45] ​There's some degree of sacrifice and everything you do. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:32:47] ​It's it's. Right. They are going to be visible. And that Part D there, most of the viewers are engaged and they shouldn't be looking off the road anyhow, but usually when they're traveling on the road or maybe traveling between the parks with recreation and tourism based. No. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:33:17] ​I'm fine with number 9. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:33:20] ​Now. Anyone else have any comments? [00:33:26] ​OK,. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:33:27] ​I don't have any. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:33:30] ​Oops, sorry, pushing the wrong button. [00:33:36] ​Impact of historic and archeological resources. There were none identified in the part one, so that's why that was answered, no. Everyone want to accept that? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:34:02] ​I accept it. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:34:04] ​Looks good to me. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:34:05] ​OK? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:34:06] ​I think I understand. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:34:07] ​There is some impact on open space and recreation. [00:34:18] ​So we are changing some of the wildlife habitat there, but I think that's fairly minor considering the remaining open forested areas. [00:34:31] ​It is private property, so I think the biggest recreational use may be there may be some snowmobilers that are using it now, I don't know, but they should be able to go around it, still have trails. And in part C, the proposed action may eliminate open space, a recreation resource in an area with few such resources. I believe there's a lot of the resources still available. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:35:00] ​Yes I think so too. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:35:02] ​Um. You know, it's going to be impacted by some members of the community informally using it as an open space, there may be people that like to walk through there, look at birds or whatever, and they may be allowing hunting on it, but... [00:35:26] ​Is everyone in agreement with that? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:35:28] ​I'm fine. I'm fine with number 11. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:35:30] ​OK. Number 12, critical environmental areas? They were not identified. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:35:41] ​I'm fine with 12. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:35:43] ​Yeah, impact on transportation? [00:35:47] ​It's not going to change transportation at all. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:35:49] ​I'm fine with 13. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:35:52] ​Impact on energy? They're going to be producing it. Which we said, no, that's not going to impact energy usage. [00:36:03] ​Everyone would agree with that? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:36:05] ​I'm fine with 14. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:36:07] ​OK? Impact on noise, odor and light? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:36:12] ​Okay. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:36:13] ​Um, really the only impact there would be during construction, you're not going to have extensive lighting, they may have some... Utility lights at the transformers that they use when they service them, if they have to come out at night. But they're not proposing brightly lighting the facility, everyone OK, with that? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:36:41] ​What's that? What's the noise level on that? On the Transformers Dan? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:36:53] ​Normally, the invertors usually are louder than transformers, and I don't believe they have a real high decibel level. I'm partially deaf, so I probably don't hear when I'm close by it. But my experience with solar projects is that if you're if you're 100 feet away, you're not going to hear much of anything. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:37:18] ​How about the sub-audio sound. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:37:23] ​I... I don't know. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:37:27] ​Of and I wonder someday we'll have to figure that out, I guess. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[00:37:33] ​It's less than an AC unit actually put in a window. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:37:38] ​Well, not not that not the hearable sound, but what they call the sound below the certain level of the sound in the below grade low Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:37:48] ​subsonic. [00:37:51] ​I can't remember the name of. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:37:53] ​SubSonic subsonic. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:37:54] ​If Marcus was here, he'd tell me, but. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:38:00] ​Infrasound. Board Member Richard Teeter ​[00:38:01] ​Infrasound. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:38:02] ​Yes. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:38:04] ​I wonder if there's any significant level of infrasound from any of the equipment. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:38:14] ​If there is, I haven't heard anyone ever mention it, at least not the way they do with wind turbines, that's for sure. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:38:21] ​Right. Dan, do you have thoughts about that? Dan Huntington? Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[00:38:31] ​We've never had any sound complaints, we've done a noise study in our shmo project, but that was mainly focused on the battery storage units because they did generate a slight buzz. But again, at one hundred feet, it was undistinguishable. Also, there's currently solar arrays on the property that are going to be closer to any of the houses than ours would be. [00:38:56] ​So if that is a concern of anyone's, I can pull the numbers, but I can say with a high level of confidence that no one is going to hear our project as long as they're not on our property and walking directly up to it, they should not be able to hear it at all. [00:39:11] ​And I would also encourage the board, if they are curious about current sounds, to go check out the current Renovus solar arrays that are out there. You can stand right next to them and it's whisper quiet. So I don't have any concerns about it. [00:39:26] ​I personally don't think it will, it has any impact. But again, the noise study we did was more around the battery storage than was the inverters. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:39:40] ​There are some things some types of equipment do produce sound that's below that actually hearable level, and to some degree that sound can be more damaging than than what's in it, something that's a 30 or 40 decibel range. But. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[00:40:03] ​Sure,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:40:04] ​I guess I guess. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[00:40:05] ​We are also located next to a private airport. So if sound is truly an impact, I would just want to know what the mitigations are are required for other businesses or entities that may produce louder noise. [00:40:23] ​And if it's a similar request, then I completely understand it. If it's something that's being studied or requested that's outside of the norm for other industries, I would just need to understand a little bit further to know what that impact is and the reasoning behind the request. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:40:39] ​I understand that and that. And there's definitely validity to that, to that logic at the same time. [00:40:47] ​The grandfathering of any any type of a building project at all doesn't always have awareness or inclusion of issues that we don't know about, you know, so we can't go back and tell somebody you can't you can't build the house because it's going to do this. But in the future, we can say, I don't I'm not feel like there's any reason to limit this project because of the noise level. [00:41:14] ​I would like to understand better, though, if there's infrasound levels involved with any of this equipment. So in the future, we can just take it into account for whatever we're going to do. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[00:41:26] ​Definitely. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:41:30] ​I'm ready to go on. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:41:31] ​Yeah, OK,. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:41:34] ​I haven't heard anybody mention electromagnetic frequencies, which is a big issue in some circles, but that's controversial science as far as I know. So it's not something we're going to get into. But if I was living next to it, I'd be more concerned about that. And then infrasound, I think, but that's just me. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:41:57] ​Seems like all science these things are controversial. But the times we're living in but... Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:42:06] ​Anyways, I guess with interference, I guess, would be one thing, but no, the units, the standard inverter units have passed a UL listing. I don't personally I haven't looked at it, you know, to know. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:42:27] ​There was at one point. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:42:28] ​There's interference on the power lines, but I don't believe it's going out into radio in the radio spectrum, maybe to interfere with radio signals like really for the airplane, for example. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:42:43] ​Yeah,. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:42:44] ​I think New York State does do studies on power lines for electromagnetic frequency and electric fields, so the magnetic field and the electric field and so for this slower, lower concentration of power per unit. And I personally am not concerned with that for personnel or people in. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:43:14] ​The whileback they, 10 years ago or so, were putting in radio towers, cell phone towers in Enfield and it was quite a bit of controversy. But there were meetings where people were up in arms and never coming to blows. [00:43:35] ​But there certainly were two sides and they were based on science. You know, there's enough science to say it's good enough to say it's bad that there could be problems. So I just I'd like to. I like to think that we at least have thought about everything that needs to be thought about nothing else. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:44:01] ​OK, so we're on 16 and we feel that there's no impact on human health? [00:44:15] ​Does the board agree with that? Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:44:18] ​I feel that way. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:44:28] ​I'm just going to read through it real quick. That's OK. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:44:31] ​Yeah. Most of the DEC considerations here relates to hazardous materials. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:44:50] ​I see that, yeah, yeah. Well, I would have to say that 16 our answers to their questions are fine. I think it's fine. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:45:00] ​OK, as in as in the many, many, many hours that we spent working with the wind farm approvals, we found that it's a little bit... The problems that the wind farms were creating were not really commonly known at the time. So the questionnaires like this or studies like this didn't really include the kinds of hazards to people's health that were being brought up. The way they were happening because of things that weren't really common knowledge. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:45:39] ​Yeah. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:45:46] ​Seventeen,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:45:48] ​Seventeen, consistently with community plans? This is sort of a double negative? Is not consistent. So I'm saying no, it is consistent with the community plan, which is our comprehensive plan. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:46:16] ​That makes sense. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:46:19] ​So that's why I put no on there. Nothing in the part 1, C-1, C.2 or C.3 were answered yes on the part one. [00:46:42] ​Everyone in agreement with that on 17? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:46:47] ​Yes. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:46:48] ​I am,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:46:50] ​Yeah. Fine with me. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:46:52] ​OK, consistency with community character 18? Again is no,. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:46:59] ​I'm good with that. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:47:00] ​And it is consistent. And why they do it negatively. I think it is consistent with existing community character. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:47:20] ​Yeah, I think it's hard to say if it is. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:47:25] ​Yeah, it's weird the way they worded those. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:47:27] ​Questions are not good. I mean, it obviously is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape, anything that man made is to a degree you just have to decide on scale. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:47:46] ​All right, what you get if you look at the neighborhood, you've got a uh, a retail establishment that has a lot of construction type equipment stored that they sell of pipes and stuff, so. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:48:02] ​It's a good place for it. It's a good place for it. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:48:06] ​OK. Plus, there are two other solar projects on the property, plus there's one across the street across Mecklenburg Road, too. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:48:15] ​So I'm fine with 18. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:48:17] ​OK. Almost done. [00:48:25] ​That was, so that was 10. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:48:30] ​That was 10. Yeah,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:48:30] ​That was it. OK. So... [00:48:40] ​Part 2. Basically says, we're not having any major impact environmentally. So that brings us to part three, which is the determination of significance. There were no part 2 items or questions where there was an impact that was potentially moderate to large and... [00:49:28] ​This is where the board needs to make a determination of some significance. I have basically, what a statement, no impacts have been identified as potentially moderate or large. [00:49:42] ​This is where the board can, needs to make a determination, and I'm not going to make the determination. I suggested that based on the actual. [00:49:55] ​Input on part 2. [00:50:01] ​The board needs to discuss it and make a determination. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:50:07] ​I agree with the determination that you came up with their Dan. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:50:12] ​OK? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:50:17] ​I agree, Is there? I mean, is there any other... explanations that we need now. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:50:24] ​But basically we're going to give either a negative or positive declaration, right to. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:50:31] ​So not a lot of words is needed, is. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:50:35] ​Not for what we say or if we want to say it's a positive, if we want to make a positive declaration, then we have to describe what what. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:50:44] ​What you think is the major impact. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:50:47] ​What we think the impacts are and probably good. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:50:49] ​What? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:50:53] ​But there wasn't any particular yes's that we didn't choose any yes's, so. I understand. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:51:01] ​Yeah, none of the yes's had. [00:51:05] ​A moderate or large impact listed in part 2. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:51:11] ​right. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:51:15] ​With my level of understanding information on it, I would have to say that there's a negative declaration on it because I don't see anything that's significant that I know of that's a problem. So my vote would be to give it a negative declaration. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:51:33] ​Right. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:51:46] ​This has to be signed by a responsible officer in the lead agency. Normally, that's the chair of the planning board. Are people comfortable with me signing that if you guys vote to accept it? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:52:02] ​If you're comfortable saying it, then it's fine. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:52:04] ​I'm comfortable and I don't have a problem with it. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:52:07] ​OK, so that brings the. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:52:10] ​Same same here. I'm comfortable with that. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:52:16] ​So now I'm going to throw that resolution coming up on everybody's screen? No wait a minute. [00:52:36] ​Via zoom here,. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:52:37] ​I've got it elsewhere, but yeah, no, I don't see it on the screen. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:52:41] ​There's a big block... Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:52:46] ​Lets see. [00:52:51] ​Dan that will be resolution #PB-2021-2. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:52:55] ​Stop share. And think about going back to share screen. There we go. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:53:04] ​Twenty twenty? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:53:05] ​I guess I had to move it to a different screen, OK. There's a resolution... Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:53:10] ​2021 number 2 for the planning board, planning board resolution PB-#2021-2. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:53:20] ​Dash two. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[00:53:22] ​Yeah. Thank you. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:53:25] ​OK. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:53:27] ​Um, I don't know, on the Via zoom screen, but I haven't opened elsewhere. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:53:35] ​I just. Did you do this? I just changed the screen. Did you see that? Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:53:43] ​Well, it says, are you viewing Dan Walker screen? But I don't see that resolution there. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:53:48] ​What do you see? I do have it. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:53:50] ​Just a black screen. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:53:55] ​I have it on my screen, but you and... Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:54:00] ​Henry. what happens if you press the button and change the view in there. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:54:07] ​No, I don't know, it's weird because I saw all the other documents that Dan had on on the screen. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:54:14] ​I'm going to stop sharing. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:54:18] ​If you just go ahead and read it. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:54:20] ​Yeah. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:54:21] ​Yeah. Like I say, I've got it in another window. I open it up with a document program so I can see it. I just don't see the zoom. Now I see a document, but it's not that resolution. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:54:38] ​Yeah, maybe I just need to just refresh it there, so. OK. And. [00:54:54] ​So this is a resolution I prepared, it's pretty standard language. Actually. On the SEQR form, we call that an "unlisted action". In our local law, we call it an "unlisted action". Board Member Aaron Abb ​[00:55:15] ​May not be looking at the same right at it now. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:55:21] ​Yeah, right now I don't see that. I don't see the resolution on your screen. I see. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:55:26] ​What do you see on the screen too. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:55:28] ​Solar permit conditions? The following Fische. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:55:31] ​That's I grabbed the wrong screen then. Oh, let me get back here. This zoom is so much, so much. OK, now do you see it? Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:55:48] ​Now, I see a resolution. Yes, sir. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:55:50] ​All right, I think I grab the other document. OK, so this is a SEQR resolution in standard format. [00:56:08] ​Basically, it just. Describes the project briefly, and item 1, this is an unlisted action, it's unlisted because our. It could be a type one or it could be unlisted, but they both have the same weight in determining, you have to you have to make a SEQR determination of significance. [00:56:37] ​And basically, he says, we reviewed the full environmental assessment form Part one and prepared a full assessment form parts two and three. And then the resolution is that the town of Enfield planning board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with Article eight of the environmental conservation and six NYSEG our part 617 New York State Environmental Review Law review for the above referenced action is proposed based on the information in the FEAF, Part one informities and set forth in Enfield F parts two and three, and therefore an environmental impact statement will not be required. [00:57:27] ​So if the board is if someone would like to make a motion,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:57:35] ​Let me ask well let's make a motion. I would make a motion to accept this resolution. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:57:40] ​Is there a Second? Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[00:57:42] ​I'll Second it. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:57:44] ​OK, discussion. It's all yours, Mike. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:57:48] ​My question is, I need a little more familiarity with the overall process of approval in relation to the site plan review law. This is an neg that in relation to the speaker, what is the process of acceptance by the planning board for the project in relation to this site plan review law? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:58:07] ​We have to have a resolution of acceptance? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:58:12] ​That's a second resolution. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:58:14] ​The second resolution. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:58:15] ​Exactly. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:58:16] ​Sometimes we combine them into one resolution for minor projects. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:58:22] ​Gotcha. That makes sense. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:58:23] ​But normally the process would be to have a second resolution and then you have to have the second resolution before you could consider approving the project. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:58:32] ​Right? Well, that was my question and that I have no comments. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:58:36] ​Right. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:58:40] ​So we have Patricia, you've got the document. Can you. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:58:46] ​Know, I do have one more quick. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:58:49] ​Sure. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:58:50] ​Comment. Sorry. We did the public hearing last meeting. Yes. Was it required to do signage on the site for that public hearing. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:59:03] ​We don't have that regulation. I don't believe... Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:59:08] ​That's what I. I was in a planning board hearing as an applicant last night in the town of Ulisses. And when they got everything done, one of the planning board members there said, wait a minute, was this application, did signage go up for this application, had it ever gone up? And I had known historically to know whether we require signage or. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:59:34] ​We don't require signage. I know that it is the town of Ithaca. does require a 1 by 17 inch sign on the property so people can identify where the action is happening. And I think Ulysses probably has that also. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[00:59:52] ​They didn't realize that they didn't do it. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[00:59:54] ​We don't have a regulation like that at it. I mean, it's what the Town board wants us to or the planning board feels we need to. I think it's basically just to let people know that there's something going on. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:00:08] ​Exactly. But all the notices were given to people. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:00:13] ​Yeah. It was published to and where notices were sent out to the individuals. I don't believe that was required for this. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:00:24] ​For that public hearing. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:00:25] ​Right. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:00:26] ​I wonder if it's required in our solar law. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:00:30] ​It refers to the site plan review law. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:00:35] ​Right. And a site plan review law does not require not require people to be told. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:00:49] ​Right. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:00:51] ​It's been a while since I looked through this, but what that would mean just would be that if it was required in the solar law, that we would have to do another public hearing. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:01:03] ​Right. Jude Lemke ​[01:01:05] ​Dan. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:01:06] ​Yes. Jude Lemke ​[01:01:08] ​This is because our solar law requires us to give notice to all landowners within a mile of the property and it overrides the site plan review law. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:01:24] ​That's OK. Jude Lemke ​[01:01:25] ​So if we didn't do that, then the public hearing was invalid. It's on page eight, it's. it's 6C- 14 to 6C- 14,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:01:54] ​Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the site plan review law or SEQR, any notifications required pursuant to the site plan review law, or SEQR with respect to any solar energy system shall be sent to all landowners within one mile of the boundary of the Parcel on which the proposed site is located. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:02:14] ​And I read that as any notification is required to pursue it to the site, plan, review or SEQR shall be sent to all landowners. Jude Lemke ​[01:02:23] ​But because you choose to have a public hearing under the site plan review law and then now you have to comply with this. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:02:41] ​Because this is a part of the site plan review law basically. Jude Lemke ​[01:02:45] ​Right. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:02:50] ​And with that, would that notice have to happen before the public hearing in relation to the seqr approval and the seqr approval happened without that public hearing, having been having been done with the notices, or does that need to be done? Is that public hearing with the notices needed to be done before seqr approval can happen? Jude Lemke ​[01:03:14] ​Well, I don't know the answer to that, to be honest. I'm not sure whether we were required under SEQR to have a notice, but we were required under the site plan review because you chose to have a public hearing. We were required to send a notice or the application. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:03:38] ​It sounds it sounds to me as if it's saying that we would have to have a Second public hearing with notices sent out in relation to, to be and to doing this in keeping with these with a solar law, which is part of the site plan review, but that we could actually approve the resolution of the seqr approval without that in place. I don't know if that's true or not, but that's what it seems logically you're saying. Jude Lemke ​[01:04:06] ​It depends on what the seqr rules say about notification and whether and perhaps what it said in the notification, whether the notification was somehow suppposed to be,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:04:19] ​If the speaker if you're doing and that there's no public hearing required for that. Jude Lemke ​[01:04:31] ​It sounds like it sounds like you're doing if you're doing an environmental impact statement, environmental review with an environmental impact statement, that's when you have the public input that's required. Jude Lemke ​[01:04:47] ​So that sounds reasonable, and I think the problem is you don't have. You may not have a valid notification for the public hearing for the application. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:05:01] ​That's that's what it seemed like to me. I think we could go ahead and do the neg declaration for the resolution, but then we'd have to have a public hearing with the notifications on the application itself before we can approve the application. That makes sense. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:05:18] ​Yeah,. Jude Lemke ​[01:05:19] ​That would be my reading. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:05:28] ​Well, so we could go ahead with the approval of the neg dec, if me so that's that would be a comment. That would be my comment. under comments for the resolution that we moved, that I moved to a while ago. That was Seconded it so we could go on from here, as far as I can see. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:05:52] ​Yes. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:05:55] ​Shall I call the vote on that? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[01:06:02] ​.... Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:06:04] ​Of. I guess we've had it and we got a Second and we've discussed it, so I guess if I go ahead and call the vote and I'm recusing, so I'm not voting. Aaron's voting as a. Substitute a. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:06:29] ​Planning board resolution number 2021-2 SEQR Norbut Solar Farms Enfield Solar Development. 56 Applegate Road tax parcel number 9-1-28.1, 9-1-27, 9-1-11 moved by Acting Chair Michael Carpenter Carpenter, Seconded by Vice chair Henry Hansteen member. Call the vote. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:07] ​Acting Chair chair Michael Carpenter,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:07:10] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:11] ​Vice Chair Henry Hansteen. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:07:12] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:16] ​Board Member Ann Chaffee. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:07:22] ​She's muted. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:07:25] ​Ann unmute yourself. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:30] ​Board Member Ann Chaffee. Board Member Ann Chaffee ​[01:07:31] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:44] ​Board Member Aaron Abb,. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[01:07:47] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:48] ​Board Member Richard Teeter,. Board Member Richard Teeter ​[01:07:52] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:53] ​Board Member Joseph Dawson. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:07:55] ​Joe does yet you've got five votes. That's the full board. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:07:58] ​OK, good motion carried. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:08:06] ​OK, and if it's acceptable to the board, I'll sign that as chair of the board. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:08:17] ​Fine with me. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:08:19] ​OK. OK, now we get to share. Stopping this year, the next item is actually. Reviewing the requirements of the solar law. Which. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:08:54] ​I'm confused about the notification part. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:09:01] ​You believe they would be my responsibility to send out the notifications the... It was advertised on the marquee, it was the hearing was advertised on the marquee that covers it's supposed to cover it was also on the website, right. I do know there was relevant information available to everyone in the town and county on the website. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:09:39] ​I think I think the issue here is that law does require written notifications to be sent out to people within people within a certain distance away.. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:09:52] ​OK. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:09:56] ​Does that make sense, Henry have that you've got that? Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:10:01] ​Yeah, I guess I'm looking at number 14 here and it. So this is just specific. Specific to solar, solar construction,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:10:15] ​This is specific to the solar law out of Enfield local law, number two twenty nineteen, which is an adjunct to the site plan review law, which is what we would be approving, that the the the installation of the solar system under the solar review. But the solar law is an addendum to that. [01:10:36] ​So the things that it's set in the solar law also have to be complied with in the process of approving it under the site plan review law. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:10:46] ​Yeah, it's pretty clear. I guess it just basically, in spite of or regardless of anything in the site plan law, the notice shall be sent to all landholders, landowners within a mile. So, yeah, OK, I guess I get that. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:11:04] ​Yeah. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:11:12] ​Sure, that means that means we need another public hearing and after that,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:11:18] ​If a public hearing is required under the safe plan review for this project, then this being an adjunct of the site plan review law saying that notices have to be sent? I think it would be saying that before the public hearing took place, we would also have to send out these notices so that people would actually have an opportunity to respond in the public hearing to the knowledge that that that that someone is applying for a permit to do this, that that's the way I see it anyway. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:11:55] ​Yeah. And it seems that any notifications required pursuant to the site plan review or SEQR shall be sent, so what notification is required, I guess would be my question. Jude Lemke ​[01:12:21] ​Well, I think the answer is that the decision was made by the planning board to have a safe plan with a public hearing. So once you decided to do that. Now you have to comply with discipline rules about public hearings. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:12:42] ​And the public. Well, just looking at the solar law. Any notification required pursuant to the site plan shall be sent and it doesn't really specify sent how, and. Jude Lemke ​[01:13:00] ​That's what you go to the site plan. So the site plan itself says. If a public hearing here is the required schedule within forty five days of the receipt of the application, you will pass that. Mailed the notice to the applicant at least 15 days prior to the hearing. The applicant shall mail written notice of the hearing to all landowners, this is within 600 feet, but the solar law would override it at least 10 days before the hearing and publish at least one notice of public hearing at least five days before the hearing and the official Town in the official newspaper of the Town. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:13:46] ​And you're reading that on the site plan review law. Jude Lemke ​[01:13:49] ​Yeah. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:13:51] ​Which section is that one? Jude Lemke ​[01:13:53] ​Uh, three points. You see where in my article three three point zero. It's really the. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:14:08] ​I have put that section up. Jude Lemke ​[01:14:12] ​There it is,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:14:13] ​Yeah,. Jude Lemke ​[01:14:14] ​Yeah. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:14:20] ​Yes, it comes down to if the board wants to have a public hearing. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:14:33] ​So going back into this one now, within sixty two days following the date that the planning board receives the completed application, that site plan, the Town Planning Board, shall render a decision to approve, approve of the conditions or deny. The site plan lists the Town Planning Board to conduct a public hearing. Jude Lemke ​[01:14:54] ​Which you did, you elected to have a public hearing. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:14:58] ​Right So if a public hearing is desired, required shall be scheduled in forty five days of receipt of the complete invitation from the CEO, the chair of the planning board shall notify the Town clerk to Clerks notice. So when was this application received? Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:15:30] ​I believe we officially submitted October 1st. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:15:34] ​Yeah, I believe it was. [01:15:39] ​Is everything completely submitted, all plans, et cetera? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:15:43] ​Well, the initial application was. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:16:27] ​In in no 2C, you might want to note that the Town playing board shall render a decision on this plan within 60 days of the close of the public hearing. So that's working backwards. Once we do have the public hearing, we have sixty two days to render a decision, which is fine. I don't see any issue with that. So I think it goes back to. [01:16:54] ​Let r be then in saying the planning board may conduct a public hearing regarding the site plan at its discretion, so the law overrides that and says we should, we need to if a public hearing is required, it shall be scheduled within forty five days of receipt of the complete application from the CEO, the chair of the planning board shall notify the Town clerk, so forth and so on. [01:17:17] ​So the question is, are we non-compliant? If we are not compliant, how do we want to proceed from there? [01:17:27] ​There was an issue with the wind farm application that there was a question of what actually constituted a completed application. [01:17:39] ​And it's never quite clear. But I would say, let's go back to the Dan and see what your thoughts are in relation to this. [01:17:46] ​Dan,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:17:47] ​I, I. And whether or not. Do that at this point because of my. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:18:06] ​I have a question on the site plan review law. I just went to the website and opened it up so I can see it. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:18:13] ​I just put up on the screen, too. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:18:15] ​Yeah. For some reason, I'm getting a black screen again. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:18:17] ​OK, well, you just got a bad connection, that's all. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:18:21] ​That's weird. I mean, some show up, some don't. But Jude, can you tell me what page you are looking at and what number when you're reading that part of the site plan review. Jude Lemke ​[01:18:33] ​Oh yeah. Then as on the. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:18:35] ​OK to come up to Henry., I just refreshed it. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:18:39] ​Oh yeah. Now I said all right to. And it's small, though, it's hard to read to. Jude Lemke ​[01:18:49] ​It's F2B. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:18:54] ​OK, I'm going to bring. Jude Lemke ​[01:18:56] ​Here Article three three point zero F 2 . Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:19:03] ​2A and B both,. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:19:04] ​Right when I'm looking at my own screen because it's bigger and it's easier to read. Dan it is pretty small there. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:19:13] ​I can make it bigger Henry.. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:19:18] ​Excellent. All right. So. OK, switching between screens here is. It took me a little time. I was looking again for the solar law. The notification part of the solar law and somehow I seem to have. Misplaced, I've got a solo, I've been on the notification part. There it is. [01:19:53] ​OK, so it says pursuant to the site plan review law with respect to any solar energy system. So that would suggest that the site plan review would. Would be that requirement would be specific to a solar energy system. You know, I'm wondering if that's in there. Jude Lemke ​[01:20:20] ​I'm sorry to put. It's just I mean, the application is for a solar energy system. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:20:33] ​Right, but. But my understanding is that this solar law is referring back to the Site Plan review law, and it says if the site plan review law, whatever it has with respect to any solar energy system. So which tells me that if the site plan review law has anything specifically about solar energy systems. Jude Lemke ​[01:21:06] ​I it's you saying that if you're looking at a solar energy system pursuant to the site plan review law and there's a public hearing required which you elected to have a public hearing, and this provision overrides the notice provision. In the site plan review law. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[01:21:34] ​And sometimes I have to study the legalese for a bit before I fully grasp it. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:21:39] ​But one one other thing I might add might bring into the mix is that on the Beth's site plan review, Section three point one waiver of plan requirements, the planning board made by resolution acceptance or exempt an applicant from any one or more of the requirements of this local law by waiver except for the landowner and public notice requirements. [01:22:05] ​So it's specifically saying that if there is a landowner noticing in public those requirements, those cannot be waived by this provision of the site plan review law, but doesn't give a lot of options. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[01:22:21] ​Where are we reading that, Mike,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:22:22] ​That's on three point one of the site plan review law. Section three point one, I can't tell you for sure, what page it is because, page 11! And the section is called Waiver of site plan requirements. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[01:22:43] ​Yeah, I see it. I see where you're coming from. Well, so are we agreeing that notices need to be written, notices need to be sent out to people within a mile? Is that are we? Is that what we're saying? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:23:10] ​It seems pretty clear that it is saying that I wonder if it is appropriate to ask Dan Huntington to do. Tell us what this is, what this is, but what this means for him and his planning and timing schedule. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:23:30] ​Sure. Yeah, I'm all for following the letter of the law and making sure that we follow every stipulation. We have seen in the past, if you if anyone does have a complaint about the project, if you don't follow it very clearly, any lawsuit that they would bring would not technically be against us, it would be against the Town for a procedural matter. And I would hate for the Town to then have to have a lawyer defend that. The solution actually is very simple. You just go back and do it the correct way rather than even addressing the lawsuit. I'm totally fine with scheduling a public hearing for the next meeting. Dan and I were talking. [01:24:11] ​There's a few elements I really want to get to you guys as part of the approval so that you can review them. So I completely understand the situation you're in and the two different laws and wanting to check every box in full support of that. [01:24:28] ​And that would also give me the chance to submit the last few documents that are part of our revised operation and maintenance plan, get the decommissioning legal language and scope over to to the planning board in terms of some of those things we talked about last last meeting, Mike, but also the legal language to the Town board. And I think just making sure we dot every I and cross every T is definitely not a bad thing. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:24:58] ​That sounds like that. That works for everybody. That sounds like a pretty doable plan. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:25:03] ​And then it would we would be looking at kind of a March wrap wrap up and hopefully that could be at the Town level in terms of signing a decommissioning agreement and then also at the planning board level for site plan approval that that would work out nicely. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:25:19] ​Yeah, I guess, Dan Huntington, the main thing for me would be if if if you have completed, you know, there were some things that we left open that needed to be completed or filled out or roughed out, basically, if we can get those a little bit before the next meeting in time to go over them and get it clear, it's much more likely for me to be able to give you the go ahead and everything, make sure we have them. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:25:45] ​Yeah, I was really trying to get those to you before this meeting. Unfortunately, with the owner of our company out of the country, it was a little bit difficult to get some answers and some approvals based on some of the changes. I'm hoping to have those by the end of this week. [01:26:01] ​So I should be able to get those to you within the next week for review. So that would give you plenty of time to review it. I will also tell you that we have seen some delays in terms of our negotiation with the IDA, not because of anything they're doing or we're doing. Unfortunately, part of the funding for these projects, which is called the Community Atter program, they have what's called tranches and each tranche has a different amount of money that can be allocated towards a project. [01:26:33] ​And for reasons unbeknownst to me or even New York state officials, those tranches were allowed to run out and an email was sent out saying that they are looking into potential options, but it does drastically impact the project on a financial level. Nothing we've applied for. It's called the New York Sun Grant and the community after every project we've done since twenty seventeen. And every project we know of in New York State applies for both of those grants. And to have one of them completely erased and not provided across New York State has really shaken the solar community. [01:27:19] ​So allowing another month to see if NYSERDA will come out with some new guidelines would actually help me in terms of my work with the IDA. So hopefully some of those things will be flushed out as well. And we can move forward on that level. But I do agree with all of you that adding another month following all the procedures is a smart exercise and best for all parties. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:27:47] ​So, Dan, who would then Dan Walker, who would then go ahead and do all those notifications? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:27:53] ​Well, the applicants responsible for doing the mail out, we give them the notice of public hearing that they send out. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:28:02] ​Now out of curiosity... Does that have to go in the publication I've seen in other solar laws that it has to be posted in the Town newspaper 10 days in advance or on the website or something to that effect. Is that also an element that has been. Jude Lemke ​[01:28:22] ​It has to be in the Town paper. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:28:26] ​It has to be in the Ithaca Journal probably.. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:28:29] ​OK,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:28:30] ​Yeah. Board Member Henry Hansteen ​[01:28:34] ​OK, in the paper and mailed to individual homes. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:28:38] ​And mailed to the individuals, yes. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:28:42] ​And this is done by that I don't see the language that says it's done by the applicant. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:28:47] ​It's actually what you had is done by the applicant. Jude Lemke ​[01:28:54] ​And it says it in the same plan review. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:28:57] ​OK, and that piece and not the solar law? Jude Lemke ​[01:29:00] ​Yes, it is in this. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:29:02] ​Site plan review law itself. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:29:04] ​OK, we've done this before. I just wanted to make sure we were sometimes it's the Town, sometimes it's the application. We've seen both. And I'll have to review the site plan again just to double check. I'm assuming it's probably like a certified mail situation. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:29:18] ​Yeah, it is. OK, return receipt, you know, and we will get you the document of the public posting, the public hearing and the description of that then you mail that out. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:29:36] ​OK,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:29:37] ​It's pretty clear in the site plan review law Dan. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:29:40] ​Yeah. it is, ...the other day? Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:29:43] ​I will double I will definitely double check that. That might have been an oversight on our part. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:29:48] ​It Yeah. OK. Do OK, so we are going to have a public hearing, I need a resolution from the board and I'm not going to vote on that, so. When someone likes to. Make a brief resolution. Move a resolution that we have a public hearing on the. At the March meeting on don't any. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:30:26] ​In everything relevant to the application be already available to the public so that they can read it and comment on it for that public hearing? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:30:34] ​It's we're we're we're posting everything on the Town website. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:30:41] ​But as. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:30:42] ​Laserfiche. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:30:49] ​Because, you know, some people are changing and I got the feeling there were some things changing. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:30:58] ​There were some of the some of the documentation that we needed that we hadn't received yet. Plus, Dan, the. We need this subdivision plan also because there is also a subdivision. Required. For this project, I believe that we need to do an approval on. If that can be. Sent to us also. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:31:28] ​Yes, we're actively working on the subdivision piece. We are hoping to work out right now as a plan subdivision, not a final filed subdivision. So the goal is to show exactly where the subdivision would be and that that would be a contingency of the site plan approval. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:31:52] ​Right. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:31:52] ​Filed prior to a building permit being submitted. The reason we ask for that is once you do file it, a lot of counties do not appreciate it if you file it and then change it because it does create a lot of work for them in terms of tax, partial IDs. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:32:09] ​We also have to have that outline for the IDA as well. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:32:14] ​Right. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:32:14] ​So we are actively working on that right now and hoping to get that to you as well as part of this. But it will be a preliminary subdivision that I'm hoping can be the contingency that it has to be filed prior to a building permit so that we're not going back and redoing it, because I know the previous owners were in the process of a subdivision. And again, the county does not appreciate us subdividing parcels over and over and over again. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:32:47] ​Let me ask you, can I ask a question here? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:32:51] ​Sure. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:32:54] ​So I'm going back to the site plan review law. This is page 10 again, the review and decision with public hearing, the planning board may conduct a public hearing regarding discipline at his discretion if a public hearing is desired, required shall be scheduled within forty five days of receipt of the completed application from the CEO. [01:33:19] ​Then the Town, the chair of the planning board should notify the Town clerk to post notice of the public hearing in accordance with Town policy. What I'm thinking, though, is that in order to do a public hearing, all the information that's required to be submitted for the application would have to be submitted at that point. [01:33:40] ​It would have to be submitted in time so that anyone who wants to make any statement in relation to the project at the public hearing, any member of the public would have to have had access to the completed application and all the information on it. Does that seem right? [01:33:59] ​In order for them to in order for them to have the knowledge base that they would need in order to address it completely. So it seems like we would have to have all of the parts of the application submitted by enough time before the public hearing that the public would therefore get a chance to look at them. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:34:21] ​All right. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:34:22] ​I don't know. Yeah, I don't know how many days before it's necessary to post that information. But again, maybe I would go back to Dan Huntington and say, do you feel like that's an issue for you guys in order to have all the information completed? I know there's some things that were not quite done yet. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:34:40] ​Yeah, what we've done in the past is we typically make sure that the information is available prior to the notification going out usually, and I apologize if I'm misquoting this. I believe the notification has to go at least 10 days in advance, something to that effect. So what we would do is make sure prior to sending out the notification, all the documentation is sent to the Town and can be uploaded to the portal so that upon receipt of the notification, any community member can go into the portal and see the documents that will be reviewed prior to the meeting. So I would definitely commit to getting you guys all the information in an expedited time frame so that we can have it uploaded and ready once the notice goes out. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:35:30] ​Right Section says for all public hearings, the planning board may notice a public hearing to the applicant. That's you at least 15 days prior to the date of the hearing or at least 14 days. And then the applicant shemale written notice of the hearing to all landowner's within a mile of at least 10 days before such a hearing happens. [01:35:58] ​And so just published, at least one noticed a public hearing at least five days before the hearing in the official newspaper of the Town just 10 days to the people that are close by and five days in the Town newspaper. But so then you would think probably if you're going to if you're going to send it out within 10 days, I don't know what the requirements are for a public hearing. How soon before all the information that the public is on has to be available to the public? Maybe. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:36:27] ​I, I think it's got to be available when we. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:36:31] ​When we send the notice most is my experience, at least. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:36:36] ​When the notice is given, yup. OK. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:36:38] ​So we would send out a certified mail, we would retain the receipts to show that we did send it to all the tax parcel owners and we would make sure that the information is to the Town. So just for simple numbers, we would send the information to the Town 15 days prior to the public hearing so that the Town had about five days to upload it and everything like that. And then we would send out the notices of the ten day mark. [01:37:08] ​And at that point, anyone who gets a notice in the mail when they go to look for the information, it is already uploaded. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:37:15] ​Right? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:37:15] ​Exactly. Yeah. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:37:16] ​We definitely don't want to upload information after the notice because someone may look at it at the ten day mark, and someone else may look at it at the five day mark and there could be different things there. So I'm fully, fully willing to commit to getting you the information. 15 days. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:37:31] ​That's great. That sounds really good. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:37:43] ​OK, so we'll have a public hearing in March that we get a resolution from the board doing that. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:37:51] ​That would be resolution three, and PB resolution #2021-3,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:37:57] ​I would like to make a motion that the board would hold a public hearing on the application from Norbut Solar to install a solar system at the March meeting of the Town Planning Board at six thirty. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:38:13] ​Seven. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:38:14] ​Seven o'clock. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:38:15] ​Yeah. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:38:17] ​And then we instructed the recording secretary to put out notice of that public hearing. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:38:24] ​And be done, yeah. It'll be an Ithaca. journal five days prior to. The event. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:38:34] ​Right, thanks Patricia. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:38:36] ​Yeah. OK. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:38:37] ​So we need a Second. Oh yeah. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:38:40] ​I'll Second it Mike. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:38:42] ​Henry Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:38:43] ​Yes,. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:38:45] ​OK. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter? Vote? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:38:55] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:38:55] ​Vice Chair Henry. Hansteen? Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[01:39:01] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:39:05] ​Board member Ann Chaffee? Board Member Ann Chaffee ​[01:39:07] ​Yes. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:39:08] ​Board Member Aaron, Abb? Board Member Aaron Abb ​[01:39:12] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:39:12] ​Board Member Richard Teeter? Board Member Richard Teeter ​[01:39:16] ​AYE. Recording Secretary Patricia Speno ​[01:39:17] ​All AYE. Motion carried. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:39:21] ​OK The next thing and maybe. And we don't need to go through this in detail. Last month, the board asked that for a detailed review of our subdivision or our solar law, and I sent everyone a word document. Last week I took the Solar law. Component and made comments in in bold about where we were, we stood with the application. [01:40:18] ​Everyone had a chance to look at that. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[01:40:21] ​Yes,. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:40:23] ​There are some things that were conditioned because they weren't in yet, and we may have a few more things coming in. So I guess the question is, I don't know that we need to go through this line by line at this point. I would ask the board members to look at that and if anyone has any other comments, let me know. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:40:50] ​And I think. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:40:51] ​The review document work and. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:40:56] ​Dan Huntington, Dan Huntington said a little bit ago that there were a few items. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:41:00] ​There, a few more things that we talked we talked to earlier in the week, there were a couple of things like the O & M plan that weren't fully submitted and the decommissioning plan and things like that. And those were all noted in this document that I sent out to the board members. We did get a glare assessment and there aren't any real problems there, except for about 15 minutes in, during the summer when there might be glare for the flight path. For the. East west runway from the current property owners property, actually, so... Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:41:57] ​So from this from what you sent out, Dan Walker, you basically just did, you did an overview of the solar law as it relates to the application. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:42:11] ​I took, went through the solar law, then grabbed the solar law and then a brief section. I made comments based on what information we had. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:42:20] ​And then Dan Huntington, you were going to deal with the different sections that were questioned or that were incomplete. And that's what you're going to be working on the next week or two to get the information to the board, am I right about that, correct? Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:42:37] ​Yes. I already had worked on it for the last month with our legal team and with our owner. And we are very close. I should have answers on all of it by the end of this week. And I apologize. I was not able to get it over to everyone in time for this meeting, which was what I was pushing for. But again, our CEO is out of the country right now, which made it a little bit tough to get answers when he doesn't have a Wi-Fi signal. [01:43:04] ​So, yes, we do. We have addressed all of the talking points that we reviewed at the last meeting. I can address a couple of them right now if the board wants to hear them or if you want to save them for the public hearing, that's totally up to you. Some of them are in relation to the chain link fence versus farm fence. And a few other pieces, it's up to you if you want me to submit it all at once or address some of it now I'm comfortable either way. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:43:35] ​I guess here's my thought. When we do the public hearing it be based on it's based on existing information that we have at the time. If we do the public hearing, we can then go ahead and approve the application or approve it with conditions or disprove it. But typically we would probably approve it with conditions unless everything has met conditions. [01:43:55] ​But if in the public hearing, if after it's after public hearing, we make any significant changes, which is not really clearly defined, but we have to define and say if we make any significant changes in the application after the hearing, then we are supposed to do a public hearing again. So I'm wondering if there's a process by which we can look at the information that you want to send to the board in relation to these, let's say, five or six different areas of questions that are still open if we want to try and get that defined more clearly or. [01:44:33] ​It may not need any changes at all, but but if it does come in and we find that there are areas that we do want to change, I kind of hate to wait until the public hearing and then have to change something really significant that then makes it well, we have to do another public hearing into that. [01:44:49] ​So it would be great to get it as defined as clearly as possible in the areas that are really questionable. I think the fence one is not really questionable. I mean, either way, that's not a big deal. I think the decommissioning plans are very significant. I mean, that's a big part of the Solar Law. So that that's going to be an issue in terms of how the decommissioning plan is stated and developed. So that would be one that would be good to know. [01:45:18] ​And maybe we could do that tonight. Or maybe maybe it'd be better maybe if you don't have a completely settled yet. Maybe we should do it on email over the course of two weeks, or should we just wait for a public hearing trying to sort it out then? And that's a guess, I guess, a question for both Dans' in my mind. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:45:35] ​Yeah, I mean, we can say there were several items that we were outstanding that I know that we would have to condition any resolution of approval on, and it'd be better if we had them nailed down. And the one one issue that I think is. It would be important to discuss right now is the. Setback, the size and the, parcel, or the coverage, the, [01:46:19] ​ lot coverage, an. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:46:21] ​That seems to be an issue definitely. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:46:24] ​I mean, we talked about that last month a little bit. The total. Project area is the 90 acres, and I talked to Dan about that, but they had listed that the panel area was like 30 acres. But our definition of lot coverage is everything inside the project fence? Basically. Because you have like 50 percent coverage. [01:47:01] ​You know, the panels actually cover 50 percent of the area, but the intent of the law was that it's the whole plant which is within the fence and we've got a lot of the total lot acreage is two hundred and some acres and but for the 93 acres, 60 percent coverage would mean that the the project parcel area would have to be one hundred fifty five (155) acres to meet the 60 percent coverage. And there are some, you know, uses that may not. Like, if you put housing on, I don't know what the board feels like, say, with the lot coverage. [01:48:00] ​Um. Right now, I know the way they subdivide the parcels for the. Actual solar arrays are pretty much along the fence line, which would mean that if we had 90 acres of panels, we'd have 90 acres of lot and that would be one hundred percent coverage, even though we have another hundred and fifty (150) acres available. It would seem like the way they have these concentrated in the middle of the parcel with an open area around it, that the strict definition of a tax parcel, may be waved at this point if they have some conditions on the remaining land, that certain amount of it would remain open. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:49:06] ​Can I read something real quick? Sure. This is, again, Section three point one (3.1). It's on page 11 of the site plan review law,and it says, "all requests for a waiver from any requirements set forth in this local law shall be made by the applicant in writing and shall contain a statement as to the grounds upon which the applicant relies for requesting the waiver, including all allegations of any facts on which the application, the applicant will rely where the planning board finds that a waiver of certain requirements is justified, then a waiver may be granted, provided, however, that no waiver shall be granted unless the following conditions are met." I assume it says the following is that it means all three. [01:49:47] ​Then "the planning board finds and records in its minutes that granting the waiver is justified and would be in accord with the intent and the spirit of this local law and this otherwise not averse, not adverse to the best interests community. Number two, there are special circumstances involved in this particular case, and denying the waiver would result in undue hardship to the applicant, provided that such hardship has not been self-imposed. Number three, the waiver requested and granted is the minimum degree of variation from the requirements of this local law, as is necessary to accomplish the relief found appropriate in connection with such waiver applications. [01:50:27] ​Then B. The planning board, may condition the granting of any waiver upon any one or more reasonable conditions or requirements." [01:50:34] ​So I'd say that definitely leaves room for some moving around in terms of boundary lines and location of the panels. I know when the Solar Law was being written. This was a question that had probably two meetings with the discussion. We kept bringing it back up, trying to decide actually what was the best thing for the community, best thing for Enfield to do in relation to lot coverage. [01:51:04] ​So I would think it would be an issue in this particular case that we would want to discuss and look at a lot more clearly and and and to say, is the way they want to do it actually in the best interest of Enfield rather than the way that the law is written or not. Or is there some option that we could tweak it somewhat here and there? It seems to me that there certainly are options, though, for waiving that if we decide it's appropriate. [01:51:30] ​I don't know if there are options for changing the structure of the panel around without having really significant issues in terms of the developer and the owner of the project. So I would think that maybe a larger, a larger scope issue that we would want to deal with at some point pretty soon. That makes sense? Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:51:56] ​Yeah, if I could just chime in real quick, I think my biggest question right now is typically when we go into a town that has a solar law and especially towns that have site paln review laws and solar laws, we typically work with the Town to figure out which set of rules we're following. My only concern here is we appear to be bouncing back and forth between two sets of regulations and kind of picking and choosing which regulations of which process we're following. [01:52:33] ​And again, to the point of I want to make sure we do this correctly and we do everything that we're supposed to do because I don't want any issues to arise later. I'd rather, you know, slow the process down, do it right, make sure everyone is comfortable with how it was done. [01:52:50] ​The only thing I'm getting a little bit concerned about is we're kind of bouncing back and forth with regulations for the solar law, but also site plan review. And for our purposes to clearly understand what our obligation is, I would have to talk to our attorney to figure out what we fall under. [01:53:08] ​Both my understanding. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:53:10] ​Dan, the solar regulations are an addendum to the site plan review law. OK, it's one it's one document. I mean, we did think they're published as separate documents, but it's basically one regulation. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:53:27] ​OK, and that could be my I might be misinterpreting it according to what we've done in previous towns. And if and if that ends up being the case, again, we want to follow every law and regulation and make sure we're following them correctly. I know we do run into a little bit of a hiccup, specifically with this law when it comes to subdivision and looking at the parcel. And I know we've gone back and forth on how to address it, whether it's a supermajority vote or a waiver or something to that effect. [01:54:01] ​So anything we can do to figure out what that looks like in advance of the public hearings that we're submitting a document that meets the criteria. I guess my comment originally was just I want to make sure we're hitting the right criteria, and whichever piece that is, I'm happy to follow. I just want to make sure that we don't run into an issue later on where we end up subdividing the parcel, and all of a sudden that site one doesn't fall under the criteria, does that make sense am I hitting that correctly? [01:54:37] ​Yeah, I want to make sure we subdivide with enough extra acreage and things of that nature to meet the intent of the law without building in, as Dan noted on this document. [01:54:49] ​Sixty three (63) acres of unusable land. Because in the long term for the Town, that would negatively impact potential tax revenue. If it's something that gets locked up and we can't develop it later or it has to be forever wild, I would hate for the intent of a law or the verbiage of a law to negatively impact future opportunities. This is my main concern, so I guess I'll have to dive into it a little bit more with the combination of site plan review and the solar law to make sure that I'm meeting both of those requirements in tandem. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:55:40] ​OK. Did we lose Mike? [01:55:45] ​(Mike has left the building). Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:55:53] ​Mike? There you are. OK. So basically, we've got to have a proposed subdivision put together and we know what the regulations are as far as coverage and, I know sometimes the logical thing for a solar facility. Would be to have everything. As one lot, but with the wattage issues. You have to restrict it to a five watt, five megawatt per parcel. [01:56:56] ​Which, you know, basically you have 20 megawatts that you want to have, and it would make sense to be able to use that as one big parcel, but that's not the way NYSERDA and the rest of the world works, right Dan. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:57:11] ​Correct. Yeah, NYSERDA requires us to separate them in five megawatt AC blocks. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[01:57:18] ​Right. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[01:57:19] ​Otherwise, anything larger than that, if we were to consolidate 20 megawatts inside one fenced area, they would then consider it a major energy production center, and it would fall under totally different regulations under the NYSO, instead of community distributed generation, totally different style of how the the credits are applied. Totally different financials. So it's really NYSERDA that that deems we have to legally subdivide each five megawatt parcel into its own parcel. We don't totally know why, but that's the regulations they set forth. [01:58:01] ​And so that's why we do subdivide it basically with an extra 20 to 30 feet outside of the fence. But again, I just want to make sure we're following the intent of your law and in presenting you with a subdivision that meets your understanding of the project and in the land around it. [01:58:22] ​So to Mike's point that we don't submit something, know, everyone's looking at it, wondering why it is done this way? I want to make sure I submit a description with it, an explanation. I think it'll be pretty self-explanatory once you see the boundaries. But again, with the 60 percent lot coverage portion of everything inside the fence, that does present the issue of needing a waiver or supermajority vote to overcome that piece. [01:58:51] ​So, again, I just want to make sure we're doing it correctly and do it right the first time so that when we submit it, we we don't have to go back and and and redo it and create a little confusion as to why it's being redone and all that stuff. So. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[01:59:05] ​I mean, let me say something in relation to that, I don't think that requires a supermajority. I think it just requires a majority vote for the waiver of the intent, the intent of the solar law. And my understanding of it and I was a part of development of it, as well as Dan and someone who spoke earlier too. [01:59:23] ​We really were trying to strike a balance between the fact that we really want to develop and support solar energy in the town of Enfield. We want to be open and we want to be supportive of that happening with them. And at the same time, we just want to protect resources, we want to protect the people that live in the Town. [01:59:42] ​It's pretty simple. I mean, that's that's really the basis from your description of the reasons why you had to do this. It sounds like you're following pretty closely within the reasoning that's in there to grant a waiver under site plan review law. [01:59:58] ​It sounds like all the reasons for you needing to do it this way are coming in keeping with those waiver conditions that were there. So right now, I don't see anything that's really in my mind that would prohibit you from being able to get a waiver. I think it would just be a matter of trying to get a really clear picture of what it is we're trying to accomplish and have it so people know if we get some public input on it, that's negative, then we can look at it. [02:00:25] ​So I can't personally, I can't really think of any negative impact of this. The 60 percent was not that significant to me in terms of the original, but there were some members of the committee that it was fairly significant. [02:00:41] ​So I would probably go back to them in the next week or two and try and get their input from it and see what they think about it as well. But from right now, I think what you're doing is entirely in keeping with the procedures that we've established. And I think we should just continue on with those procedures and see right now. I would be ninety nine percent pretty sure that we can find some way to make this work for you and for the Town as well. [02:01:09] ​That's why I thought about ... Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[02:01:15] ​That's great to hear. Yeah, we were hoping to have a lot of extra land that can either be farmed or kept forested or forever wild, things like that. And so, yeah, I hope we can definitely work down to showcase what it is we're trying to do with Subdivision. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:01:32] ​And that's great. Good. Are there other areas that we wanted to address? Dan Walker,. [02:01:42] ​I think I think it's getting a little bit. We've been at it long enough, I think, right now, I guess what I sent out that document breaking out the solar requirements in the in the solar addendum and just want all the board members to be aware of, I put my analysis on a technical basis there, and just as a starting point, to talk for the final approval, just to make sure we had everything covered. [02:02:21] ​And. I think if everyone has an opportunity to review that and be prepared to bring up any if anyone has any issues that they want to bring up ahead of time before the meeting next week, just review that and send them to me. And we can compile that into a document that highlights any concerns anybody has, we have something to talk about, you know, talking points for the next meeting. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:02:52] ​OK, I guess I have a couple of quick things that I would want to say to. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:02:56] ​Go ahead. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:02:57] ​One is that there were a lot of things in the last board meeting for me about the decommissioning plan that were pretty open ended. [02:03:08] ​And hopefully, hopefully those are more. I don't know if my thoughts about it were really clear to you, Dan Huntington, about what I was thinking about it. But to me, that was really the meat of the Solar Law with the decommissioning plan. [02:03:26] ​That was really a pretty significant part of it. So I would think that I would hope that that would be, you know, something that you're definitely working on. [02:03:37] ​And I would say that probably the best thing for me would be if you would just read the Solar Law very carefully and see what it says and then try and make a plan that's in keeping with what the law says. And then then I won't have any problem with it at all if it's in keeping with the law. And that's the solar law itself. It is. I think there's five, four or five pages on the decommissioning plan. [02:04:01] ​And we did spend a lot of time on the language of it. So I think if you just read the language and have a clear understanding of what it says and if you feel like it can be in keeping with that, I would think that would be fine. [02:04:14] ​The only other issue that comes up right off hand is that and this is I'm sorry to bring it up in your case, unfortunately, the necessity for it in my mind came from another instance when we had an application for a wind farm. [02:04:31] ​That was accepted the application was accepted and public hearings were done on it, and after nine years, I think the application still was not complete. So we kept asking them for them to complete the application. In the end, they finally withdrew the application. Then they didn't complete it. And that was that it was actually because things happened in the meantime that they didn't realize that made the wind farm actually impossible to do, that they couldn't do it. So they withdrew the application. [02:05:07] ​But it feels to me to some degree there is that the Town is saying if we are going to have a public hearing and the public hearing is supposed to be done after the application is complete, it seems like we should we should really have a completed application, one that that everyone considers complete before we actually do the public hearings to be in keeping with the with the overall sense of how the process is supposed to work and the timelines. And I can see you agree with that. And I think that's really valid. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[02:05:38] ​For sure. What we've actually asked for in other towns is, is we run into the issue of boards in their laws, have a stipulation saying, you know, a public hearing has to be held in X amount of days, a rendering has to be made in X amount of days. [02:05:56] ​And typically what happens is we're on. We don't hold towns to those because a lot of times when the application is not complete or when the application does meet all the requirements, but there's more questions. [02:06:11] ​So I'm in full agreement with you. I think maybe at the next meeting, subject to the fact that we get all the information to you in time, I'm very confident I will get that to you with ample amount of time I think it would be trying to do both, that the application is in fact worthy, if that way prior to the public hearing. [02:06:33] ​That way, there is a record for all these documents. They met the requirement and we do feel it's complete. Now we're going to discuss our document at which time we can go through the nitty gritty of does the decommissioning meet all of the aspects of it. And to your point, I did go back and review it with a fine tooth comb, and I amended our submission to make it more clear and concise to meet the requirements. [02:07:03] ​So I agree with you. I think there should be some kind of vote to say that, yes, it has in fact been complete. [02:07:11] ​At that point, you have the public hearing and ideally it will be so complete that you feel comfortable voting on approval? In terms of the actual project happening, our grants and even the decommissioning plan have limited time limits in it. So specifically for the New York Sun grant that we applied for. We have to have the product built and energized within 30 months of application. [02:07:41] ​So we do have a timeline. Otherwise we lose that grant, built and energized. And the same thing applies for the decommissioning. If we start anywhere in the world within a year we can be in the commissioning plan called into action. So those restrictions are definitely helpful in making sure we get the project working. But I can guarantee if we purchase the land at the end of our first contract, we will actively try to get the project up and running as soon as possible. [02:08:17] ​To try and recoup that investment. Yeah, nine years of no project, dragging it on is pretty outrageous. I would be pretty frustrated if I wasn't. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:08:27] ​Well, I think everybody was pretty frustrated about that one. Let me.. Dan Huntington Norbut Solar Farms BDM ​[02:08:31] ​ time and energy. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:08:33] ​Let me go back and read one more quick thing here. I find language sometimes is very helpful. So this is again, this is page ten of the Enfields' site plan review law, and it's F2-a. and this is review and decision with public hearing. [02:08:51] ​"The planning board may conduct a public hearing regarding the site plan at its discretion. [02:08:57] ​If a public hearing is desired to require it, shall be scheduled within forty five days of receipt of the completed application from the CEO." That's the. That would be Alan Teeter, I think, right? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:09:10] ​Yeah, code enforcement,. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:09:13] ​So. So at this point, I think you take this whole definition of what a completed application is, is a little bit problematic. Certainly with the wind farm, we accepted something and began public hearings on it long before it was completed and I think there's a little bit of slack there. [02:09:39] ​The fact is, a completed application should have all the parts in it. It doesn't mean, though, that there won't be any changes at some point. So I would I would think that if we have all those parts before the public hearing, then from what I understand, the procedure at that point then is that we look at all those parts and we decide nine tenths of them, 99 percent of them may be just perfect to us and one to 10 percent may not be an issue. [02:10:08] ​My understanding is that we can take those areas and we can either ask you to change them right then and do that as a process, or we can grant conditional approval based on what we have and say this is for this year. But you have to do this in order to get the final approval. [02:10:29] ​And so before we can give you the permit, before we give you final approval, you have to submit these things. You have to change these things, and then we can negotiate back and forth on how to change those things as long as they're not terribly significant. And we don't have to have another public hearing at that point. [02:10:45] ​We just would say no, that it's not a big deal. It's not enough that the public is going to be bothered by it. And if there was something like some changes in how we fund the decommissioning plan and things like that, I don't think that would be anything that would require more public hearings at that point. [02:11:02] ​You know, we could just come to some terms of that. So it seems to me that we could go ahead and do that public hearing with the understanding that you will have all those parts in to the Town and to the planning board at that point. [02:11:16] ​And then they also will be available to the members of the individuals in the Town to read off the website before the public hearings so that they can read them as well. That seems to be a workable plan to me. That seems OK with you, Dan Walker? Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:11:28] ​Yeah, no, that was good. And that's why I sent my review document to Dan Huntington. Just we're pretty close to having everything together. There are a few items that he needs to finish up that they've acknowledged. So we should be in good shape with a complete. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:11:49] ​And so the rest of the documents that Dan will then submit will be on the website. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:11:53] ​Yes. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:11:54] ​As well for people to do that to you. [02:11:56] ​So, yeah, I've been accepting a lot of the documents and sending them on to the Clerk the post, but technically they're going to Alan. But Alan doesn't isn't too worried about the process because once it gets to the website itself, it's in the public record. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:12:15] ​So I do want to say one quick thing. I wonder if Stephanie and Bob Lynch are still on with us. Town Supervisor Stephanie Redmond ​[02:12:24] ​I'm here. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:12:26] ​I would like to say something about the Town website. I know there's been a lot of different people using it and developing it and working on it and adding things to it. I spent about a half an hour the other day trying to find the site plan review law, on the Website, never really succeeding. [02:12:44] ​I did go to somebody who was more familiar with how to get places, and he told me that if you do this and then go to this and then go to this and this, by the time you do this, this, this and this, you actually can find the site plan review law and I did and it was great. I am not computer savvy, but I'm certainly not somebody who works in computers. [02:13:08] ​I would just suggest that at some point that the Town board would look into the process of trying to get a larger oversight of what documents are on the website, how they're formatted, how you find things. And because it's for the members of the public who aren't computer savvy, I think you're going to have a hard time finding things sometimes in.... Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:13:31] ​It's important, it's important. Town Supervisor Stephanie Redmond ​[02:13:33] ​If we put... Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:13:34] ​It's important we have access. Town Supervisor Stephanie Redmond ​[02:13:35] ​If we put a special button on, you know, for a specific folder for these documents that you want, what specifically or what documents would you want in there? Something specifically for this project or site plan review in general. Are you looking for more, General? Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:13:54] ​Well,. Town Supervisor Stephanie Redmond ​[02:13:54] ​If Laws or. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:13:56] ​If I were to get a wish list, I'm going to say somebody who really knows the stuff I'm doing websites puts in a "search" button and all I have to do is type into the search for current site plan review law. [02:14:06] ​Site plan review law. I found eight different copies of the site review on different places. Most of them were addendums, most of them were bits and pieces. So if there was just if it was a little bit more user friendly, it's not any specific thing, it's just the whole thing. [02:14:26] ​There's been a number of times I've looked for things on the website that sometimes I found them and sometimes I didn't. And it was and it just wasn't clear how to find things sometimes. And I don't know, I'm not a website developer and I know I know some people are. [02:14:41] ​And I know you there are a lot of professional websites you go to that you just start swearing under your breath that are... Who did this? They know I don't know how to get anywhere on the site and other ones. You put something in the search bar and like, well, lo and behold, everything everyone opens up right in front of you and it doesn't it tells you how to get there. [02:14:59] ​So it's so I don't I don't want to make a big deal out of it. [02:15:03] ​I just want to say that at some point, perhaps in the future, when the board is a little more settled out, that we could we could have someone come and just take a maybe an outside look at the website and say, OK, how can we make this work better? Town Supervisor Stephanie Redmond ​[02:15:17] ​OK, first of all, try to put a search bar in there and see if that helps. But we also have money in the line or in a line specifically this year designated toward I.T. for the website and for the email changeover. And it's a significant chunk of money. So we can probably hire some help to make it a little bit more user friendly as well. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:15:34] ​That's great, thanks. I didn't mean to hijack the meeting. I just noted that my searching over the last week. Town Supervisor Stephanie Redmond ​[02:15:40] ​Yeah. Councilperson Robert Lynch ​[02:15:47] ​I think they are going to be changed on the website anyway. We're going to go to a new format, I think, in a month or two. So that might be something that we can consider then. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:15:58] ​Great. Thanks, Bob. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:16:03] ​OK, are there any other concerns that any board members have at this point, comments, questions? [02:16:18] ​I'm open to accepting a motion to adjourn. Vice Chair Henry Hansteen ​[02:16:27] ​I will make a motion to adjourn the meeting. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:16:30] ​OK. Board Member Aaron Abb ​[02:16:31] ​Second. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:16:32] ​Second with Aaron. [02:16:34] ​All in Favor? [02:16:35] ​Yes,. [02:16:38] ​AYE. [02:16:38] ​AYE. [02:16:39] ​YES. [02:16:39] ​AYE. Acting Chair Michael Carpenter ​[02:16:39] ​Thanks Dan Thanks for all your work. Board Chair Daniel Walker ​[02:16:42] ​We will be talking. I'll be sending a bunch of emails as soon as we get stuff in. [02:16:46] ​And thank you for the meeting tonight. [02:16:50] ​Thank you. [02:16:51] ​Thank you. [02:16:52] ​Good night, everybody. [02:16:53] ​Good night. [02:16:54] ​Good night.