001[Music] Okay. Good evening everybody. Welcome to the Tuesday, October 7th, 2025 meeting of the Lichfield Planning Board. Would you all please stand for the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> I will do the roll call of members. Michael Cto, chair, >> Jesse. No, alternate. >> Russ Blanchett, member. Travis Tucker, member. >> Uh, Jeremy Robert, secretary. I got my own name there. >> Letha Riley member. >> Okay. Uh with us this evening, Jay Manara from NRPC. Welcome as always. Uh and uh Joan, our planning board administr administrator is here. Uh absent it looks like, is uh Jared Okonnell, our vice chair. Um we'll see, maybe he'll show
002up. Um with that said, uh appointment of alternate members. Jesse, did you want to um we can appoint you to uh vote in Jared's place tonight if um you so desire? >> Yes. >> Oh, and I also um I think we our ex official member is not here this evening, Mr. um >> yeah, Steve Ganon. Sorry, >> forgot about that. Forgive me. Um okay, so we've appointed uh Jesse No, he'll be alternate tonight um for voting purposes. Um, first item, public input on non-aggenda items, items not listed on the agenda for this evening. Is there any members of the public wanting about anything about non-aggenda items tonight before we get started? Okay, hearing none, I will close public input on non-aggenda items. Um, we'll go to number one on the agenda this evening. We have
003a signed permit application for Finnegan Fence 457 Charles Macrooft Highway tax map 21 lot 18-1. Uh sign will be uh internally illuminated with white LED. Total sign size is 52 square ft on a stone base. Uh the total height with stone base is 135 in. Is the applicant present this evening? Yes. >> We'll ask the applicant to come forward, have a seat at the table. Uh, state your name and address for the record. >> Good evening everyone. My name is Jason Gagnen from SUSA Science here on behalf for Finnegan Fence. Okay, welcome. Um, so we do have a sign application this evening. Um our zoning uh regulations I believe it's uh 1,500 uh is uh regards signs. Um obviously um for the application for this purpose tonight and thank you. We have copies. Thank you
004very much. Okay J. Um so it looks like in order to um have this application before us um uh so basically the planning board will review all sign applications we need six copies of the proposed design that's in our regulations of the sign to sub be submitted to the planning board with the appropriate fees. I guess I'll turn to you Joan. Do we have that uh this evening? >> We have these and since we've gone to electronic transmission to the board we have two copies. >> Okay. and fees have been paid and the butters have been notified. >> All right. Um I don't know if that's something we may want to at some point >> change. Um obviously our regulations say six copies of the proposed design of the sign that's to be submitted. Um
005but we have the appropriate fees. Um basically the design shall indicate the size, height and type of mounting, location of the sign with respect to the site, road right of way, abudding property lines, type of material, lighting, um single or doublesided. Um and have a butters been notified, Joan? >> Yes. >> Okay. Jay, um have you had an opportunity to take a look at this application? I'm just curious. >> Yes, you did. And do you have any concerns? Do you think it's all in order? Uh yes I do. I think the all the required information was submitted and um it appears to be you well within all of our um dimensional requirements requirements etc. >> Um so with the um the fees being paid the butters notified and um Jay's um has reviewed them um
006we're going to do what's called a motion to accept an application for completeness. This is a paper exercise to basically ensure that we have everything we need for the application. Um, does anybody want to entertain a motion uh for the application for completeness this evening? >> Sure. I'll make a motion to accept the application for completeness >> for this um applicant. Um, I have a motion by Jeremy. Do I have a second? >> Second by Russ. Any discussion? Okay. All those in favor of the motion to accept the application for its completeness, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed, anybody abstaining? All right. Motion passes 6 0. All right. We've um done the application for its completeness. We voted on it and approved it. Um so I'm going to ask the applicant
007at this time to uh make his presentation to the board. So you're have the floor, sir. >> Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, well, good evening. Uh, the project at hand would be to installing one new double-sided freestanding sign with internally illuminated sign cabinets. The sign is going to be off on the, if you're staring at the front of the property, the right hand side of the driveway. It's going to be approximately 10 ft set back from the property line, 20 ft from above the road edge. At the time of the drawings and the measurements on the presentation, um the property lines had not been staked out. So we had gone based on the 20 ft to incorporate the standard 10-ft setback. Um the sign faces themselves, I mean it's going to be a traditional
008UL sign cabinet. It's going to have acrylic or lexan faces, translucent vinyl graphics. um all internally LED illuminated using white uh lighting system which is great in green and it's great technology at this point. The lower sections if you'll notice they kind of say coming soon. Um, one thing that I did see uh recently is that I actually have a quick drawing is that the black and white rendition, if you will, is going to stay, but it's just going to add a kind of things that are on site uh wholesale supplies and um family owns just a few things. But what you see on the submitted drawings, it's not going to be reversed out or do anything kind of on the opposite spectrum. Um, the stone base at from what I believe is also there
009to tie into the building because I believe there's some wrap around the building a little bit. Um, the coloring and everything's trying to match to the building. So that way when you look at everything at one, it looks like it all blends together and it's not just a hodge podge of signage. Um that's I mean to be honest it's brand new freestanding sign new placement and um if there's any questions particular questions feel free to ask. Okay. Thank you. Um and obviously um so I would refer the board to district requirements under um 1503 of the zoning um zoning ordinance. um for Lichfield uh that regarding um signs and also um the uh general requirements under 1502 um for for signs as well. Does the board have any questions for the applicant? >> I just
010have a clarifying question. >> Um in the lower part that you were speaking of where the where it says coming soon on our our sheet, but you said it would be different. So, is that a a blinking thing or is that something that you can slide panels in so that it'll say something different when illuminated? >> Yep, >> that is a very great question. If you're referring to like an EMC unit, electronic message center, something that the church up the road has, it is not like that. >> Okay. >> So, they are hard panels that are just illuminated. Um, if they ever do get changed out for whatever reason, it's not going to be a message that's going to appear for 5 seconds, turn off. So, they're traditional sign faces that >> can be changed
011at any point, but >> so they're not flashing at you. Correct. That's what I'm trying to get at. >> Okay. >> Thanks. >> Yep. You're welcome. Anybody have anything else they want to ask? Um it's like all signs which are not attached to the building must be set back at least 10 ft from the rightway or the property line and that is in our ordinance. Um and obviously um the sign would need to be um with uh basically the sign would have to have be part of the character of the town uh which it looks like um looks like it would be or keeping with the character down. Um, so there's not going to be any like reflective materials, no banners or anything like that. >> No, the only thing that's not spelt out on
012here that may be reflective would be the the address number on the top of it just for the fire department, but >> that have you spoken with them about the sign or >> uh I have not. >> Okay. No, >> but again that would be the only portion would just be that 457 that would be just reflective. >> Okay. >> Uh Jay, do you have anything that you want to add? >> I think um you know there is sign meets our dimensional requirements which is key and there was clearly an effort to make it you know match the rest of the site. So, it seems to integrate fairly well. >> Okay. No need to go before the zoning board or anything like that. This >> No. And just uh in terms of dimensions, the where
013you see coming soon, we consider that to be reader board because that's the portion of the sign that will change out with different messaging. >> Okay. Okay. And I'm sorry if I didn't hear you. Is it there going to be any electronic messaging or anything with the sign or No, >> there is no electronic messaging with the sign. Okay. >> All right. Um, at this time I will open it up to public comment. Is there any members of the public that wish to comment on this sign application this evening? Have any questions? All right. Oh, we do have someone. Yes. So, I'm going to ask the um the folks in the back if you have any comment to come to the table. Um yeah, sort of. Sorry. Uh so you can have a seat at
014the table. Um, you're going to state your name and address for the record and um, provide your comments. >> Hi, Laura Forget. My daughter and I are the abutters of the property. >> Will the light be illuminated 24/7? Well, I >> So, what I would I would recommend is if um you're going to provide a comment to the planning board, uh state your comment, whatever it is, um basically it is public comment. It's not questioning the applicant. Okay? >> If you have a question for the applicant, we what we can do is after you're done, >> okay, >> we can have the applicant come up, sit at the table, and just address your your your concern. >> Sorry, I didn't. >> That's okay. No problem. So my concern, not even that's too big a word,
015my consideration is regarding whether or not the light will the sign will be lighted 24/7. >> Mhm. >> And sort of also I was wondering how how bright is it going to be. Our property is right next door and they're great people and I'm so excited. This is such a beautiful building, but I also want to be able to sit out in my backyard and not >> not have to look at a big old bright sign. I probably that is not necessary to even ask, but we got the invitation, so we thought we should come here. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Anything else? >> I don't think so. >> Okay. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Um and if the applicant wants to address um you know the question that from the um the
016abuter can certainly do that um at this time. >> Yes. Um thank you. Yeah, thank you for that question. Uh great questions. So, usually, traditionally with any sort of signs, whether they're freestanding and or a wall sign, um, time clocks are usually installed. So, that way it kind of keeps things, if you will, from running 24/7. Nobody likes to do that. It actually beats on the sign components extremely uh, not in a good way where it shortens the life expectancy of any of those lighting systems by usually years. I mean, most lighting systems are rated for 5 to 10 depending on manufacturer. You run it 24/7 and it dips it down to like 3 to 5 years at tops. So, to address that question, I'd say that the lighting I would I am almost 100%
017positive that there that the freestanding sign as well as a future wall sign are going to be run on a time clock. Um the hours of those I'm not 100% sure what they would be running, but I would assume that probably about 10 o'clock at night at most is probably when it would kick off. And then, you know, during the early hours of the morning, probably maybe 7:00 a.m. to 8. But I mean, at that point, once you have the sunlight coming up, there's no point in illuminating the sign during that uh time frame. As far as the colors go, um the Panone 349 is kind of uh it's not like a grass green, but it's more of a forest green. So, that color by nature is a little bit on the darker end of
018it. When you illuminate dark greens, they do tend to deepen up a little bit. And from the drawing, there's the night rendering uh portion. The most the brightest parts of it are going to be the white text that are going to be coming through that background. So, um, honestly, if they would have gone with a much brighter green, I would definitely see some concern in that. But because it's a darker green, you know, the distance, you're going to be able to read it from a distance, but it's not going to be uh extremely bright in your face if especially like with some of the EMCs that you do see around where you can read them from, you know, 1500 2,000 ft where you can see the background of it. Not in this scenario. Okay. Anybody
019have any questions? >> Yes, Liz. >> So, is it fair to say then that you're a sign guy? Is that what you do? >> Uh, I've been in the industry for 20 years. I do a little bit of everything. Yes. >> Okay. I'm asking because I'm wondering if is there maybe an example off the top of your head of something in and around the area that we might have seen that that is similar that maybe you guys have done or others have done that would kind of give you an idea? Um, the only one off the top of my head that I can think of is the LKQ sign that came before the board I think seven, eight years back, but that I don't believe was illuminated. >> Yeah. >> So, that's a bad example.
020Um, >> okay. >> Off the top of my head, I'm not thinking of anything recent. And with regard to um that young lady's concern back there, the 6,000 white LED, what is that? Is that like Christmas tree light? I mean, like how how bright are we talking? >> Great question. So, back in the day where everything was referred to as foot candles, >> the K stands for Kelvin. it is the brightness the conversion for the LED system. When the LED diode dodes came out, they created a new rating for it if you will. >> Um I know there are foot candle conversions to go from backwards from Kelvin's to the um foot candle if you will, but typical LED lighting is between 5 to 10,000 for its brightness. This is kind of almost a middle
021of the road. that brightness usually reflects when it's not on a within a shielded unit. So, with this having a sign face and translucent graphics, it's going to tone it down quite a bit. Um, so as far as how bright is it going to be, if there's any wall packs, most of the wall packs I think are between like 6 to 8,000. And I mean, if you look at them, they're pretty bright. This is going to be a lot less just because it's has a shielded unit to it. Okay. Yeah. I mean, I was trying to get perspective from like I know when I pass police cars and emergency vehicles, I'm blinded driving. So, so I can only imagine what it's going to be, you know, if if it's anything like that if you live
022near it. But you're telling me no. >> No, it's not going to be like one of the uh police cruisers or any of the fire trucks that have the LED bars nowhere near. >> Good, cuz that's awful. >> AJ, question for you. Yes. Um, our guideline here does mention >> a brightness level for electronic message displays. Not exactly the same thing, >> but it's at 3000K, >> right? >> Obviously to be dumb down because the do of that sign. >> Is this going to be somewhat like that? You think when it's all said and done in that ballpark? >> This would be me t taking a um educated guess. It would probably be between like the 3 to 4,000 range. Um, obviously with EMC's those are unshielded and you're staring directly at the dodes. So,
023>> okay. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> And I know our regulations at 1502.02 as to design and lighting say no lighting shall glare, obstruct or interfere with the vision of drivers on the road. So, um I assume that's not going to be an issue. >> Correct. I have a question. So, the portion of um of the sign that the white illuminated text, I assume that that's going to be diffused, right? Cuz whatever the light's going through to project the whiteness, I guess. Uh I'm trying my best to convey what I'm asking. But it'll be diffused, right? Like that part of the sign. >> Correct. Yeah. So, it's going to be, like I said, um not 100% sure whether it's going to be a Lexan or an acrylic. The minimum uh thickness on this
024is either going to be 316 or a quarter inch thick. And even though it's translucent, it is if you put it up to the wall, it's pretty opaque. Um so once you start having a light come through, then it it I mean it's definitely the face acts as a diffuser in itself. >> Okay. So it's not like just bare LED going through. >> Correct. Yeah. You're you will never see the LED dodes inside of the sign with sign faces like this. >> Thank you. You're welcome. I >> also just had a quick question. I think part of the reason with the 3000 thing is it's a lot warmer kind of cozier yellow light. So I know with this um what kind of light do you think would be transmitted? I know you kind of have
025like that white thing that it goes through. Is that going to be like are we going to get like paper white on the other side of that? Is it going to kind of mediate that and make it any yellowower? Yeah. No. Very good question. um with the trying to see if they noted. So with different manufacturers >> once they start hitting the 3 to 68 they also do offer the different the warm temperatures. >> Um what we found best is with all of the signs that we produce that typically going with a 6 to 8 it produces a bright brighter white so kind of like a paper white. Mhm. >> Um, and it's just as far as legibility, it doesn't look like it has a little yellow tinge to it. Usually when we see things
026that look like a yellow tinge, it just tells us that there's an old sign lexan face or something that needs to be replaced and it just doesn't look natural. >> Anything else? All right. I guess I um I guess we'll ask what is the will of the board? What would you like to do? We have the application um before us um were you looking to approve it? Conditionally approve it not approve it. I think he's answered our questions to our satisfa to my satisfaction concerns. Um >> based on our regulation uh based on the zoning ordinance uh for signs I think pretty much covers what we have concerns. >> Um so does anyone want to entertain a motion for the application? >> Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we um approve the signed permit for
027Finnegan Fence, 457 Charles Bankraftoft Highway, tax map 21, lot 18-1. Okay, I have a motion by Russ. Do I have a second? >> Second by Travis. All right. Any further discussion? Okay. All right. Uh we'll take a vote then. All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed, anybody abstaining. Motion passes. 6 0. That's it. >> Thank you very much and enjoy your evening. >> Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Actually, Joan, do you need the originals or do you have copies? >> I have a copy. >> Yeah. You need a copy? >> Oh, I have. >> She has one. Okay. >> All right. Moving on to the second item on the agenda this evening. We're doing the zoning ordinance work session. Um, have a good evening everyone.
028Thank you. >> Um, so it looks like we have a couple things on the agenda this evening. Accessory dwelling units, square footage, home daycare by conditional use permits, solar installations, electric vehicles, possible to wire for new home construction. So, I guess I'll at this time I'm going to turn over to Jay. >> All right. So, I'll start off with a couple of them. Um, we we really talked to two of the items that I was going to address. I don't see one of them on here, but I have a couple of paper copies. So, I don't see the I'm missing it. I don't see the ADU. Okay. On the site, >> it's not up there. >> So, at any rate, um I could actually probably this will give me a second and I will go
029back to our last meeting because I think it's there. >> Oh, have that. Thank you. Well, I don't see it there either. Um, I do have a couple of copies though that I passed out. Um, so really there's very little change from the last time we ran through proposed changes to the accessory dwelling unit ordinance and these are designs to comply with changes to um, state law that came into effect in July. um without running through them all um again uh necessarily unless you'd like me to. Um the big change is is that we now have to allow um both attached and detached ADUs by right. Previously a detached ADU uh was allowed as a conditional use. So the intent of the ordinance um for the most part is really or the amendments that are
030proposed are just to reflect that change. it would no longer be a conditional use. So the language throughout uh where it references conditional use or planning board approval has been modified. The real question I think that we had was on page one whether or not we should increase the um maximum size of an ADU. Currently it's 800 ft. um that is within the you know the limits of the law so we do not have to make any change to that 800 ft. Uh the question is do we want to and I think what the board was hoping is that we would get some input as to the size that of ADUs that have been proposed you know to the zoning board because I think that was the issue that you know we've had some have
031gone to the zoning board a few I think um that have exceeded the 800 ft. >> Okay. So that's really the question is do we want to um you know increase it? I don't know if we have any more information on those variances. >> I yeah I did check >> okay >> with the building building inspector. He's only denied three that wanted to go larger that they had to go to the ZA ZBA >> that exceeded the 800. Is that what he's saying? >> Exceed the 800. Not to say that people are out there not wanting to do it. They just haven't pursued the denial to get to the EB. >> Okay. >> So, three out of how many? Any idea how many we've had this year? >> All I don't know how many we've
032had. I have a few detached. >> And of those three, were they asking for like 1,500 square feet, 1,000 square feet? So if these are allowed as of right um >> then they wouldn't come to the plan. >> They're not going to be coming to the plan. >> Right. >> Okay. >> So they would go to the building inspector and the building inspector would have to >> That's right. Got it. Okay. >> And we don't have to make that decision now. But that's that's why that one is highlighted. >> So it doesn't keep you it doesn't keep you from maybe building something bigger. It just means that you have to come in. >> No, it does keep you from building. >> Yeah. I mean, this says your limit's 800 ft. Uh if you wanted to
033exceed it, you'd have to go to the zoning board and try to get a varian. >> That's what I'm saying. Yeah. I mean, you still would have that avenue to pursue. >> You would just have to argue your case as to why and appeal >> um for hardship. So that's right. >> I mean, so I mean, as long as that avenue exists, I don't know. Sticking with what the state has, but >> yeah, we could certainly leave it at 800. So the state minimum is 750. So we are higher than that. >> Okay. >> A little. >> Um, so I mean we can leave it as is. Uh, and perhaps when it goes to public hearing, if the board decides to send it to public hearing, we might get input. and suggesting that we increase
034it, decrease it. >> Be curious to know how many people like would want a thousand square feet because if I was going to do an ADU, I would do at least a thousand probably around 1,000 square feet. >> But yeah, >> you know, that's just me. I don't know. >> No, that's me also. I'd want 950 myself. >> Yeah. And I think also almost all the ADUs that have come before us have been larger and had a variance attached to them. >> Yeah, >> that's that's definitely been true. >> But proving hardship in that regard would be very difficult, I would imagine, in order to get a variant. Do >> do you know what I mean? >> Yes. Um, the reverse might not be when you want to go smaller, it's because you have certain
035things that are impeding and whatnot, but if if you're going larger, I don't Yeah, I don't know how you could claim hardship on, you know, grandma needs her extra space. I don't know. Um, so maybe that avenue while it might exist on paper might not be practical for most people. I suppose is what I'm hearing. >> That's cur. >> Yeah. I would encourage all your neighbors to come out during public hearing because I'd like to know to be honest. >> Yeah. And the building inspector might have some thoughts too just based on >> Yeah. There may be those that came you to the building inspector wanted larger and found out they couldn't. >> Yeah. Didn't go to ZBA. >> Yeah. Just didn't go to the ZBA. >> So, do we want I mean um unless
036you want to explain the the changes that because I noticed that there's a red line >> red line to 500. I just suggested. >> Did you discuss that last time? I'm sorry. I wasn't here at the meeting. So, if you guys went over it, that's fine. Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. I I'll go through it then all again. So, so on the first page, the change was to I um in highlight um I showed the 800. Um you just basically again question mark, do we want to raise it? I did suggest striking the not less than 500 because I really just couldn't see a reason why. Um if you want it smaller for whatever reason, I guess you could have it smaller, but I mean that's up to us. Um and then on the second page,
037um you know, again, uh section 50706, that's a section that says conditional use permits. Needless to say, we struck that. Um but we do have certain requirements. Those are permissible. Uh so I just change it to additional requirements for detached ADUs. And um again striking the language referencing planning board uh conditional use permits after that. And then in the next section you can see u planning board is replaced with building inspector and conditional use permit is replaced with building permit. Um very very similarly in the subsection E um you uh we say has the appearance of um customary buildings etc. Um I I I I struck this because one of the the statutory changes is is that you can't impose any design requirements on a on an ADU that you don't impose on single family
038homes in general. So making a distinction between the two didn't make sense. So I struck that. So those are the changes. All the other substantive requirements remain. >> Does anybody have any questions for Jay? Any other questions about this? Um, does the board want to submit this to first public hearing? I don't know if that's what you guys want to do. >> Does he want to raise that 800 foot limit to 950 and then take it to public hearing and see if it sticks? >> Could you want to do that? I mean >> it's just yeah rough number based on my best guess of of what makes sense. I don't have any data to support that. >> Yeah. I don't >> Yeah. I mean, I would have to I would I would want to I
039think I would want to what is a I mean, I what see what an 800 ft versus >> the 950 or a,000 >> um just to compare I guess and see >> visually what that would look like um if we did that. >> Between the first public hearing and the second public hearing, we can make a substantive change. So, if we wanted to change that number, we could. I like that. I think it's worth sticking with 800 for now because I I think people might come out and let us know, well, here's why it needs to be higher. Here's why it should stay the same. And I don't want to kind of take that initiative for people. >> Okay, sounds good. >> So, we'll leave that at 800. And um does anyone want to entertain
040a motion to send it to public hearing? >> So moved. >> All right. >> Motion by Travis. Do I have a second? >> I'll second the motion. >> Second by Jeremy. Any further discussion? >> Okay. All those in favor of um pushing this to uh the accessory dwelling unit um regulation um for both attached and detached ADUs by right. Um to send it to public hearing, please signify by saying I. >> I. Those opposed? Anybody abstaining? Motion passes 600. So we'll send that to public hear. All right. Thank you. So the next one I have is um relates to failing childcare facilities. This is also uh in direct response to a change in statute. And um so there's a couple of things that came with that statutory change. One is um what's called family home
041or family group daycare must now be allowed um in any district that permits residential uses. Um it is actually you just kind of flipped a page. >> Oh, I missed it. Sorry. >> Um sorry. Uh so it has to be allowed in any district that allows residential uses and um it can it either has to be allowed by right or as a conditional use. And so that kind of in looking at our ordinance, our ordinance uh puts um family child care uh and under a home occupation and which is fine except that we actually don't describe what a home occupation permit is. >> Um it's there but it's not a site plan really. And uh and also I would add one of the statutory requirements is specifically says you can't require site plan review for
042a family child care. So it seemed to me to make sense to say let's just define what a home occupation that requires planning board approval is. So that's really the first change. So we and just as a refresher we have two types of home occupations. ones that are allowed by right and ones that require planning board approval. Um, so what I'm suggesting is under section 504.03 is where we say home occupations requiring planning board approval, we change it to conditional use permit. So now it's clear it's a conditional use permit. We know that's something authorized by statute. um in general and specifically when it comes to child care facilities, we can require a conditional use permit. Obviously, another option was to allow it by right, but I figure it makes more sense kind of within
043a regulatory scheme to require the conditional use permit. Um so otherwise, uh so that's the first change and um moving on down um to section 504.4. four there are changes in uh some of the requirements and the terminology used. So now we have two types of um facilities that we describe family home and group um child care facilities. So I've inserted both rooms. Uh we just said family child care. So now we're using those terms as conditional uses. Um the next is really minor. You'll see the six in parenthesis crossed out. That's simply because we don't do the parenthesis thing. Any other time we use a number just there. So, I figure let's just be consistent. That's not substantive. Um, and then you'll see this the language that's added at the end of the paragraph
044provided that after school um and holiday increase in capacity is permitted by the state fire code and in compliance with any local ordinance. That's just straight out of the statute. I don't know that that really adds much, but straight out of the statute. And um then I add the second number two for family group daycare home facilities. It's a really awkward term. Um their capacity is 7 to 12 children and we didn't address that at all. So that's a whole new paragraph addressing family group child care facilities. That's really the only change. is really changing it to a conditional use um and bringing in the language from the statute exactly as it's written in the statute. I took no liberties. So that's it. >> Any questions for Jay? >> Well, and adult daycare, the same
045thing that falls into this >> as a conditional use, right? >> Conditional use. Yes. So all of the home occupations that require planning board approval, we just now will call it a conditional use permit. >> Got it. >> So that's it. >> We have to update all the tables and stuff too, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. Any other place will have to make a change. >> Okay. So, um, really as I looked through the statutory changes that came out of this legislative session, those are the ones that I believe require an ordinance change. There are some changes that affect um, our regulations. One of those we've already dealt with, which is the parking. Um the only other one I think what we will have to address is the um 5-year exemption from changes is now seven.
046Um that's that's not huge. We should do that. I figure we can wait till after town meeting to do any more regulatory changes. Uh most of the other regulations don't affect. Um so at least I don't think they do. Um, I suppose somebody could argue, but um, one of one of those being that you do have to allow multif family now in commercial zones that have adequate infrastructure. Um, I take that to mean water and sewer. Um, we don't have public water and sewer. U, that said, we actually do allow commercial uses in most, but not all. Uh, I'm sorry, residential uses in most of our commercial districts, but not all. So, I think we're fine on that one. And if there's any change in the guidance, we'll find out. So, that's it for these.
047The other one I threw in here was really more of a is this something that we want to look at? And so, that is the new New Hampshire model um solar zoning ordinance. Um so, I passed out around some copies last time. I'm not sure if people had a chance to take a look at it. Um I think really the question is is is this something we want to entertain? And um what it does is it is new um and it it is put out by clean energy New Hampshire and they are clearly an advocacy organization that is encouraging alternative energy mainly solar. So um that's the lens that it's coming from. They certainly want communities to address it. We really don't address solar in our ordinance. Um we are allowing it as you know
048on um home individual homes etc. So that's something that we are allowing. Um, what this does is if it's again if it's a direction that we want it to go in, it provides a lot of definition around the different types of solar installations. So, you know, rooftop solar, ground mounted solar, you've got the parking lot canopy type of solar, you can see they've got examples of an air of row mounted and single access, etc. There's inground, on ground, dual use. Um, so there's a lot of different ways solar can be installed. Is that again something that we want to address or regulate? The real biggie is um the distinction between solar installations that are an accessory use. You have a commercial building or a home and you're putting some solar panels on the roof versus
049what they consider a dual use. Um, I actually saw this in Carver the other day, a cranberry bog with solar panels mounted above it. Uh, so that would be considered a dual use. The AC, you know, the agricultural use is active and obviously spa strategically spaced are these, you know, I guess polemounted solar panels. Um how that's economically feasible I can't imagine unless there's significant grant money going into putting that aside that's dual use so you've got it's not just on the roof this has now become a significant use of the property and then you have primary use where it is um and again you'll see these groundmounted solar installations um and again those could be inground or on ground and that really is the primary use of the property Um and we're seeing more
050of that. Um some areas we've seen, you know, forest land cleared. Of course, it's on agricultural land. And um so the questions related to it are one, do we want to describe these things in our ordinance? And do we want to allow dual use or primary use solar in at least some districts? And that's just a question. If The answer to any of those is yes or maybe then what I would do is try to take because what you have here you this is called a model ordinance but it's really a lot of guidance and definitions. I was going to say there's a lot in here's a lot like 22 pages of >> we don't want we don't want or need 22 pages but if there's any interest in going in this direction >> and
051if there isn't fine but if there is any interest then what I would do is go through this and pull out the pieces to actually put it within the context of an ordinance that would fit within our regulations. So that is the question. >> I recall maybe that had to do with >> we had something was it a Warren article a couple years ago about solar that didn't pass because people were upset because >> some people didn't have it and the ones that did have it were going to get um compensated or something and it turned into a complete I think it was taxation that you got a taxation or something. Yeah, it was >> and I know that failed. Um, >> right. >> I think I mean obviously solar is something that's out there.
052Um, >> but I mean how we want to approach it >> that's is another matter. So I don't know how the board feels about that. >> I would like an opportunity to just read through it because I haven't had an opportunity to do that. Yeah, I don't know if anybody else has um or I don't know what anybody's thoughts are on on solar right now. Um but certainly if it's something the board thinks that they want to tackle, we can certainly do that. I'm not saying can't. Um but >> I don't know. It's a sort of a >> Okay, >> we still want to take another look and digest it. more than happy to to go through it but the process but uh like I said I mean I I just don't know how the
053residents of which people are going to >> I don't know >> I have it in my house I like it just has a purpose my energy loads and charges my car um once it's on my own personal roof so right >> it's an aesthetic eyesore but it has a purpose um >> being in the middle of a field in town that may not go so well in this lovely kind of like a solar I Someone would have to really convince me that it would be okay as a primary use. I mean, I you you Yeah, >> I don't know if that'll fly in, but >> primary use, like I said, you'd have to convince me, but the the dual use, I don't know. I'd have to learn more about it. >> Could probably find some
054examples >> because farmers might I mean, they for them it might it might make sense, you know. I don't I don't know. I don't know the answer to that. >> I guess the the question would be what's in it for Lichfield? What's in it for if you're going to do it? And there's got to be a something. I don't know what it is, but it's got to be something that >> um whether that's a benefit to the town or something, but I don't know what that is. But it's just like you're going to have to try to if you're going to make the case for it, I think you're going to have to try to do that and figure out what's >> So when you say there's no anything about solar in any of our
055ordinances. Um, so there's no talk about buffering any of those with natural buffers or anything either cuz that, you know, when I think of some of the ground mounted things I've seen, personally, I'd like it hidden more by trees. >> So, I could be wrong. I believe our ordinance is completely silent. >> So, it's at this point been up to interpretation. >> What about the master plan? the town. >> Well, that's a good question. >> Um, I don't know. Um, my guess is it's also silent >> because I'll bet the chapters where it would have come up are probably too old. >> Uh, and we haven't seen a lot. I mean, I will say in this region. So, the examples that I can think of um of dual use um Fidelity Investments in Marramck put
056in a large array on their property. I think that would be large enough to call that dual use. Of course, you can't see it from anywhere. >> Yeah. >> Uh Penach Waterworks did um an array in NSHA on property they own. Um you know, that would be dual use, I would presume. And I would also assume it's taxable in both communities, although I don't know that. Um, of course they put it on top of the schools in NSHA, um, in Hollis and many communities, but that's roof mounted school that's different. But those would be examples of a dual use that I can think of. Um, there is one proposed in Milford that would be um, municipally owned, commercially developed. There is one in Hudson very similar. It's proposed on an old landfill. That's the >>
057That's a great use of land. >> That's not uncommon. >> Years has years to break down. So, >> right, there's nothing you can't do much else on. >> And then the other examples uh that I can think of are agricultural. Kimble Fruit Farm has a few. They're the ground mounted big round things that look like radar. Um, but that's off the top of my head. There's not a lot more. That's That's partly also just because New Hampshire doesn't have generous incentives. >> Yes. >> In Massachusetts, you're seeing a lot more of it where it is commercial. You're seeing a lot more of it in Maine where it's incentivized. Um, and there you will see, you know, part of a mountain side that, you know, the forest is cleared and it is right. Um, so you're
058seeing a lot more of that. That gets controversial because you're cutting down trees to put up a solar array. It's always and you're also seeing it, of course, on agricultural land because it's already open. >> Some of that's dual use, some of it isn't. Some of it's, you know, sheep grazing in between them. And so, yeah, we everybody, you know, uh, folks can take a chance to, you know, read through it. And um in the meantime, maybe I'll come up with just some visuals, some examples they might be able to look at and see. >> Good idea. They're certainly not the prettiest things to look at. >> Yeah. What surprised me was how many different kinds. I thought I knew all the kinds and when I read this, I was like, "Oh my gosh, wow."
059>> Yeah, that surprised me too because it's it's also not all or nothing. It's maybe you're allowing these types. Maybe you allowing >> dual use, you know, on ground, not ground mounted as an example, because in that case, >> there's no structure. It's movable, right? You could take it away. Um, but those are just some examples of there might be things in here that help us inform what we do. The flip side is um we could decide we don't ever want to see any of these in town and we could be clear on that, too. Um, >> so we also I believe don't we have an energy committee or did we have an energy? >> We did we did. >> Well, is it still active? >> I don't think so. I thought they were waiting.
060>> I think their focus was on the community power, I think. Okay. >> Um, where does the middle school solar array fall into this? >> I would assume it's exempt because it's school districts, >> right? So, they could do it. um that but that would be the question is um if we had a commercial building would we feel similarly how would that be dealt and I don't know the answer to that if a commercial building were to put a solar array on their roof would that just be considered the same as a residence um I don't know >> or the I mean the town itself the municipality wanted to have a use for it or something I don't know I mean just Is there something that >> would benefit that? Would that benefit the town?
061>> Yeah, you know, especially depending on what what happens to the the elementary school stuff. >> Um any new fire, police stuff, those buildings could also benefit from those if designed properly. So >> those may be more doable than >> going on a more grandiose scale of building solar farms. I don't think people are going to like that idea. >> No, probably not. No, I I I really don't think I think that will that will not go over well. >> Um but if we can keep it >> simple, maybe >> right >> or maybe allow it in a commercial industrial zone but not >> Yeah. >> you know anywhere else. >> So those are all things to think about and um we can take a look >> if we want to do something with it
062we can. >> Going back to the home daycare, what did you decide to do? you kind of went right into sorry passed over. Um, does anybody have any questions about that? Um, and I don't know. Does anybody interested in sending it to a public hearing? >> Yeah, it all makes sense. And Jay is copying from the statute, so no real changes there. So, yeah, I'll make a motion to go ahead and accept that for public hearing. >> So, you're going to do it. So, this would be for the um home occupation, >> the home dayare, >> home care, and the uh adult daycare. >> Yep. >> Okay. So, you're making a motion? >> I'll make a motion to send to public hearing and send and seconded by uh Letha. Okay. Um any dis further discussion
063on that? >> All right. All those in favor of sending those to public hearing, please signify by saying I. >> I. Those opposed, abstained. Motion passes 600. Okay. That's the last one before we get to EV charging was the this came from the building inspector and it would be a change to the definition of a duplex. So right now we we our definition is for the term duplex or two family residence and our current definition is two attached dwelling units contained in a single building and this would add the phrase sharing a common party wall. And that was the building. I don't really know what a party wall is, but that was the building inspector's term, right? From the >> Yeah, it means a wall they share. That's all, >> right? >> Um, okay. So,
064also encapsulates two family residents. Would a party wall include a floor structure? >> Oh, because I've never seen two families that are side by side quite as much. It happens when I when I was commenting the duplex. >> Yeah, we did have a picture of I think it's on there. You mean as opposed to up and down? >> Correct. >> I think the >> floor put on the party wall or not. >> Yeah, it had that horizontal end >> because the party wall has specific fire plan required for it. It's drywall on both sides of the whole thing. Um whereas the floor doesn't have that. So >> that's a good point. >> Going vertical would be an issue in this case. >> You can have a um you know two family that's one unit above
065the other. That's true. >> Mhm. >> Maybe we asked the building inspector for his >> We have to come back on that one. >> Well, I think we I the picture on there. >> There is a picture. I think it's for um >> there's an example. >> It's on the way. I'll go. >> Why am I in September? >> Echo down. >> Come on. >> Adding a drilling. Yes, it's showing. There we go. There's a sketch. The bottom part of the sketch shows it. >> So, it's it's calling for a different fire assembly between on a floor level, >> right? >> Yeah. I guess I've never heard that called a party wall, but sure. >> Horizontal party wall. That was a floor. Sure. >> Is there not just like a a definition from like the
066international residential code that we can use? >> They do call it a party wall. That's where he got >> That's where it comes from. I've never seen it as a floor, but >> like do you know what what year that was? >> The revive >> years now. >> Like I'm looking at 2021, but I don't see party wall. >> I think >> Oh, it's you get lost. You don't don't even dig in that book. You >> No. Yeah, I figured. I just was trying to find a clear concise way to kind of mention like the the floor separating thing. Yeah, I was going to say you could probably footnote it and with a reference to a picture like this that shows the distinction, you know, just either put an asterisk to it or a footnote
067that basically calls out, >> right, >> the the the official language that is party wall. >> Yeah. Or is called the 1 hour fire separation, >> right? And and we actually do have, you know, images in our regulations. So if we really felt an illustration was >> it might be for the average person who reads these things and who >> well granted any builder that they're going to work with is going to know but at the same time you know >> right >> wouldn't hurt to >> or just include this drawing either we include the drawing or the language I say we put this is not drawing so I >> agree very self-explanatory. >> Mhm. How would this affect duplexes with a common with a garage between the the units? >> So, >> the dumbbell
068style that we've seen. >> Yep. So, the walls between the two garages are fire 1 hour fire rated. >> Okay. >> You can't see it, but it's there. >> Good. Yeah. So, this wouldn't prohibit that as a building choice for a developer. >> I think it would too. I think the building inspector said that it would. I don't want to discourage that variety of house from being developed if appropriate for the land it's being developed upon >> by saying that >> this is the only way to build a property. >> Yeah. Hudson adopted something very similar um expressly to prohibit the dumbbell. So you have to have the wall the units have to be divided by a wall. They can't be divided by a garage or by a breezeway or some other structure. They have
069to be adjacent to each other. >> But I've only seen them built with the party wall even in the garage separating them separating the units. >> Yeah. But under this you have to you you have to in order to do it, it has to be like it's shown in these uh renderings. So in in the case of the one above by side by sides, the garages would have to be on either side. They couldn't be in between. >> Yeah. If that's the case, I'm against this change. >> But what if what if say you've got the garage on the first floor, two garages next to each other, there's living quarters above it as part of this unit and this unit, but you've got a wall that extends between the two garages and the upper level
070living all the way up through the attic. >> Right. I don't want I don't want to speak for the building inspector, but I would think that would be permissible because the units themselves are are separated by the party will. >> Yeah. >> So that so the living the you know the dwelling portion of it would be. So, in your instance, Russ, where you say you wouldn't want to prohibit building that way, where would there be a firewall between the two if you if you allowed somebody >> between those garages? >> Okay, >> that's what I've always seen them built. And it goes up to the roof, too. Goes to the roof. >> So, if the if the roofs are as a a regular >> So, it would still exist. It just doesn't necessarily follow this
071definition, >> right? It's not part of the the residential envelope. It's part of the It's separating the garage units. >> Got it. I just don't want to take a a viable option off the table for a developer to make housing that is desirable. >> Yeah. >> If a developer wants >> Is it desirable to do that? >> I would live in one of those. >> It does keep your neighbors further away noise. >> Mhm. So >> Oh, share. You don't share a wall they're both living against. >> Got it. Yeah. So >> yeah, because I my parents lived in a townhouse once where it was as I described. They had two garages next to each other and then there were bedrooms that did touch the walls, you know, but it >> Yeah. Interesting. >> Yeah.
072So if the outcome of this change is that we prohibit a style of building, I'm against the change. >> No, I I agree. >> Yeah. I think in a town like Lichfield where you have more space, you know, um and presumably more of the horizontal space as well. Um if somebody wanted like a ranch, a duplex ranch, if you will, next to each other with the garages in the middle. Um, yeah, I wouldn't want to prevent that in particular. >> So basically this is applying to including the definition. >> It would it would change the definition. >> It would change the definition. >> Right. >> Yeah. This is an illustration and whether we wanted to if we wanted to make the change whether or not to include the illustration is just something we would decide.
073Okay. I guess it's up to the board. I mean I don't what you guys want to if you want to table this or if you feel that this is something we need more information on. Um >> it's a change I don't believe we need to make. What was the impetus for the building inspector aside from just using common language? >> Because he wanted a wall from the ground from the basement level to the attic to be uh separating the units because we've had issues on breezeways trying to be duplexes. But wouldn't in the instance of the lack of a better term the the dumbbell building wouldn't in order to get a co they would have to do that anyway. Do you know what I'm saying? What? >> Not necessarily. There has been one that didn't
074have that >> connection. >> And because it was maybe below ground, not above ground, >> was two houses attached by a breezeway called it called a duplex. >> But a breezeway is not a wall, >> right? So, I'm trying to make the distinction between I understand the building inspector wants to avoid any future issues, but if it's going to run into that anyway, >> but he did say that like Russ is saying that the garages in the middle wouldn't be allowed with that with that depiction that we have. I'd like to hear him come in and tell us and tell us why. Because I don't understand why the garage probably wouldn't work. >> I built that myself with the firewall between the garages. So, >> can we have him come to one of our meetings?
075>> You certainly can do that if state. >> Yeah. You can't see the firewall there, but it probably exists. >> It has to. >> Has to be, >> right? I I think the objection is is that it's essentially two single family homes. That's that's the that's the issue [Music] >> to attach single families. Okay. >> But it's nice. >> Well, but they can't because they've got a single driveway. They can't have two paragraphs, right? They're, you know, >> Yeah, they can't. >> Why can't we build nice things? We can't have nice things for us. >> Should I get him into the next meeting? >> Maybe ask him. Maybe ask the building inspector if he can come. >> Yeah. >> To the next meeting. uh give us a little bit of um summary of what he's
076trying to she uh what he wants to do um and maybe folks can ask questions and >> yeah seems like he's trying to get more information get more information better definition >> yeah it may be too vague to make sense in this case >> yeah I get it but >> I don't feel like I'm educated enough to I need to be more educated >> well I don't you want to It's true that we're supposeding >> so much debate on I think we need to have that clarity. >> Yeah. But if we directly >> we're going to make a decision that impacts that. I mean personally I >> Yeah. >> But I do see your point too like I wouldn't want to just discount like one t one style of >> that's my concern that this
077language would would prohibit that >> the time that we need. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I think smarter heads could prevail, you know, like say this is what we'd like to be able to offer what let's getting the information and you know, right deciding, you know, we that's fine. That's the prettiest looking dumbbell I've seen. >> Doing your due diligence. >> All right. So, that's it on my end. I think that takes us to EV charging. >> It does. And >> Oh, sure. So, >> I think you were the one that uh >> Yeah, I had um been doing some research um into electric vehicles um and the requirements to charge one at home. >> Um existing buildings may or may not be uh amendable to installing the required uh electrical infrastructure to support charging electric
078vehicle. It's, you know, it's not guaranteed you're going to buy a house that has a panel that has the available um capacity, has a path to drink bring the wiring from the panel to where the the vehicle is parked. Um, and in my research, I found that the city of Lebanon has tackled this problem in a way that I think is is very smart by requiring all new um construction, all new residential construction to have a provision for EV charging so that future residents moving into these these buildings once they're completed will have that that option available should they choose to purchase an EV, they'll have the the ability to charge it at home. So, what's the provision? Just having access in the panel or >> put a 60 amp outlet somewhere in the garage?
079Like what what is the provision? >> Well, there's a a few different tiers here. Uh if you if you got the email that uh Joan had forwarded out earlier. I I'm sorry I didn't print out copies. I I really didn't plan this out well. >> All right. But I um I uh pasted in the language from the uh the city of Lebanon and what their zoning ordinance includes. So for one two family dwellings um shall provide at least one EV ready space per dwelling unit. And in their definitions further down, EV ready. Oh, let's see. It's defined here somewhere. Um for multifamilies parking for multif family dwellings shall include EVSE installed spaces for minimum 5% of proposed off- streetet parking EV ready spaces for a minimum of 20% EV capable spaces and I thought this
080was a good starting point for us to have a discussion about the the possibility of requiring EV charging in new construction in Lichfield using this as a model using this as as a jumping off point to develop something that would be suitable for our our community. >> Um, would you be able to afford me that that email? >> Some reason I didn't get it. Thank you. Thank you. >> Yeah. And if you go on the link, there's the definition of EV ready space. >> Yeah, I was going to say that we're looking for that. You got to click on the link, but it's there. I I I can read it. It is an off- streetet parking space provided with a full dedicated branch circuit. >> Yeah. That includes not less than 40 I'm assuming amps
081amp year >> and uh 208x two 140 volt panel capacity conduit wiring receptacle and over protection devices terminating in an outlet receptacle or junction box that will support an installed EV right etc. >> Uh not something I'd get behind. Um, for example, Tesla, which I have and I have, doesn't work that way. Uh, there are plenty of EV chargers that are plug-and-play that would plug right into a 50 amp or 60 amp whatever is. Uh, Tesla does not do that and that's what I have in my house. Um, so that provision wouldn't even work essentially. >> Okay. >> So, um, >> yeah, there's a lot I don't know. So, I was just doing my my research and stumbled on this and thought, bring it forward and and let's talk about it. >> Yeah, it's not
082a bad idea. It's just not applicable to all brands. >> Exactly. And that's the thing. If they make them do this and they have to redo a bunch of work to make something else happen. So, right, >> it's a little bit of a step in the right direction, but it may not be. And also, the amperage might change, right? So, let's say you have a an F-150 pickup truck. They have I think a 90 amp charger they can run to charge the thing is a massive battery. And same with the Hummer, whereas mine can run on a 50 amp circuit at 32 amps. So, the car is heavily dependent on what it needs to operate properly. So having a middle of the road gap is good, but it may not work for everyone. So it's
083kind of a waste of effort if you put this in, but you need this to make it work. So >> cuz the wiring totally changes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So >> Jeremy, is there anything that's like close to an industry standard or is it kind of like the wild west? >> Uh it's still the wild west. Um the the Tesla charger is becoming a universal charger. The actual the the port I'd call it. But as far as how each individual company works with their chargers, they're still all over the map. It's there. There's nothing. >> It's kind of like USB and lightning used to be years ago, it's it's all over the place. Or Blu-ray and HD DVD. It's still not settled on yet. No one's no one's lost yet. >> So, this is premature.
084>> It might be. >> I should bring it back in two years. But then but then I wonder too like placement if you know how um >> that's another thing too >> you know when you if you custom build a house not that I've ever been able to do anything like that but if you custom built a house you could have everything all in its right place you know and the kitchen designed just the way you want it and everything else >> you know I would imagine the same thing like you say oh the garage but some people might be very particular about where in the garage how it's placed where it's placed whatever and Um, but I do want to go back to um just I I should have prefaced by the fact that
085Russ I love the fact that you're thinking differently. I think it's really good. It's really fresh. I you know, so for forgive me and us if if we kind of take it as an opportunity to be like, oh, no to this and no to that, but >> Oh, this is exactly the conversation I want to have. >> Yeah. I mean, I I think it's great that we're thinking like this and I what Jeremy just said, I had no idea. >> Yeah. Also, I didn't even >> I had no idea. >> The charging ports on the cars are actually different locations, too. >> Y >> So, if you ever see the Teslas are all in the back left corner. >> Yeah. >> But some guys have in the front right corner or the front left corner,
086some have both sides of the car. So, there's really nothing standardized at all. So, forcing a builder to put it in one spot in the garage may not work for all, which is the cord is only so long. I'm lucky enough my cord is 24 ft long, but not all the cords are that long. So, there's only like 12 feet long. If you don't park your car the right way, it ain't going to work anyway. >> Russ, do you know when did um when did they come uh when did Lebanon put this in? Like have do they have data to show like what you know how successful it's been or how many units they've brought online like this in the last however long they've had this on? >> I don't have an answer for that
087yet. Um but their web page does include an awful lot of information and links are included in the um package I sent out. >> Yeah. Well, I'm serious. >> They do have an entire electric vehicle subcommittee. >> Oh, boy. >> I got serious up there. >> So, I just Googled um EV ready Tesla. >> So, I'm just throwing out I wonder if this less specific definition makes a difference or not. Dedicated. So they say EV ready means dedicated um 240 volt power. An EV ready home has a dedicated 240 volt electrical circuit installed which is a standard um required for level two charging. So it doesn't have a lot of the other language doesn't call amperage or anything else. >> No, it just says 240 volt electrical circuit >> that with like conduit or a
088chaseway to said garage would probably be that a good minimum to go with. That way you can adjust as need be based on what you happen to have for a car. You're not forcing extra stuff that might get thrown away in a year once they buy a different car. So >> yeah, I mean I kind of looking at it at a much higher level. I I also kind of look at it like, you know, we're a capitalist society, right? and developers are gonna provide what the market wants in the same way that now apparently granite is out quartz counters are in like you know because the market tells them that so I kind of feel like I if you see more developers driving that I I you know I don't know the whole difference between
089requiring something versus a suggestion heck yeah you know I I would have no problem sitting here with the developers telling us this, we could ask all sorts of questions about, you know, hey, have you thought about this? You know, the next time um Rick Charbano comes in about the thing, you know, just have you thought about this? I'm sure he has. I'm just I'd be curious to know what what they're doing and what kind of things they're seeing in the market and what the appetite is for that. >> Yeah. >> You know, >> right. And our prospective tenants asking >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you would hope they would, right? >> Some must be. I would think. >> Yeah, >> they must be by now. People are buying electric cars. >> Well, they also have
090the very slow level one chargers plug into a 120 volt outlet, which I used for years actually with my car. So, until I installed my level two charger recently, so >> Right. Okay. >> Yeah, that's what my sister does. >> Yeah, it works for short like I could charge about 10% of my battery in an overnight period. Right. >> Now, I can charge that in 5 minutes. >> So, it's just a different use case. Uh, but now it's saved me from having to go to the major chargers on the highway or whatever else to charge during the day. It's it's mostly convenience thing in my case because it's why I preferred. >> So, but you can do it all the way. >> So, >> interesting. >> Learn something new every day. >> You do. You
091do. >> You say you charge 10% overnight. >> Yeah. So, at at 120 volt outlets at 15 amps, the charging only run at about 3/4 of that max output. It's like 12 amps total output. So that only charges my very small Tesla battery in my car's case. Uh about 10% overnight. Wow. >> So if I Exactly. It's very It's minimal. Um so I'd have to like do a big charge on the highway, leave it like maybe 80% charge, then drive home and charge most of it throughout the night and I get up like a 95 fulltime job. >> Yeah. Now it's gone with level two charger. It's all gone. I just get home and plug it in. It's done. It's done a couple hours. >> Yeah. >> Um but once again, >> every car is
092different. So it's there's no standard whatsoever. >> That's the problem with any of this. That's why this won't work today. >> Where in a few years time as standardization has has gelled it's it's better to bring as this forward. >> Yeah. But I'd love to talk to somebody up in Lebanon because that that'd be interesting to kind of follow their progress, see how successful they are >> or model suggestion route like you said suggest this. >> Yeah, why not? Like have you thought about that? >> It does seem pretty like deer in a headlight you know that they have. Um it seems pretty new. Like I was I was found a slideshow from June I think and they were kind of talking about it. I don't know kind of what made it in there but
093she's like oh we have these kind of options. This was like to to the committee. Um so they were I guess for Lebanon talking about LPL2. It's like low power level 2. I don't really know what that means. Um but they were like you know in California they require that but we'll have like LPL2 ready for 50% or LPL2 capable. So I was like I didn't think about that. I was like maybe, you know, there's a way to bring it into fruition sooner rather than later without like having I don't know if maybe that's just like a whole lot of nothing. >> Yeah, we're all talking about the level two. That's all this is based on. You know, you you don't need anything for level one really. >> Well, they distinguish it from like level
094two specifically and I don't know if if there's like >> I've never heard a make a difference in my case, but >> I was like low power level two. I was like I don't know. I don't know what that means, but >> it's probably a lower amperage draw. So, >> we're all learning. >> Yeah. interesting >> and we may decide we want to move this forward um as an ordinance or have more conversations on it or not. And other option is to look at it as maybe a regulation. Um just because I'm picturing cases going in front of the zoning board and talking about that be a little but yeah there's a lot to think about. We can also take a look around and see are there other communities around that are >> you know
095in the area that are doing it. I know the conversations are happening. >> Yeah. >> And I'm wondering what the catalyst for this in Lebanon particularly where it come from. >> Well, I didn't even think about it. No idea. >> It's the demographics I think of the area that are probably driving it. >> Yeah. >> You know, the market is talking. >> Yeah. It's definitely a question that's come up with multif family in particular because you know people tend not to have some do but a lot many don't have individual garages. >> But a garage isn't required to have a car. >> True. >> Unless you're in a multif family that doesn't have a garage. >> I've been there. >> Grew up in Manchester. I I lived in multifamilies where I had to park on
096the street emergencies. I'd be out driving around because there's no place to park. >> Yeah, >> me too. >> I've I've also seen a couple places with a c, you know, a cord going across the sidewalk. >> Oh, yeah. >> Those aren't dangerous at all. >> No, no, snowball real quick. Oh, that didn't feel very good. >> Well, that ain't happening. So, we're okay. Well, it's certainly an opportunity to >> do some research and into this and >> see, you know, >> Mhm. >> It'd be interesting to know how many people I mean in Lichfield particularly uh using um electric vehicles and >> I think we can find that out. >> Oh, I did ask over at the town Clarkson. They don't know. >> They don't know. >> No, >> they can't do a data
097thing on that. >> Well, the only brand you can search would be Tesla. Everyone else is part of other brands. They probably can't search that way. They can't search by car model most likely. Maybe they could. >> The state can because >> Yeah, I was gonna say state D records. Absolutely. >> Because they're they're charging that I'll call it a search charge that higher fee. So they must know. >> They must know. >> Search every single possible model to find out what it is. >> They'll know how many number of cylinders. >> Well, they can do that, too. I guess >> it's in the database somewhere on the state websites. We just have to find it. >> I'm sure we can. I think it's worth taking a look. >> Yeah. How many? >> Yeah, I'll
098do that myself. >> Definitely growing. I see a lot more around town than they used to see. So, it's definitely growing. Okay. >> Yep. >> Of course, the tax credits going away. Gone. >> Gone. >> And again, you know, I I refer back to the master plan. I mean, you know, solar this I mean, >> is there anything in the master plan about >> I don't >> There actually is. There is in the transportation chapter. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Because I think we did touch a >> We did something about that. Yeah, I think I remember that. >> There's even a picture of a charger I think from Dair. >> Yeah. Install. >> When are we um when are we due up for the next one? They're like 10 years, right? >> The um Yeah,
099the transportation one's pretty recent. Yeah. >> Um and I think if I recall correctly, it's in a section on like alternative technology. >> Oh, you do them by sections here. You don't do the whole thing. >> No. We're going to chapter 15. So, we've got another one with the next one. So, the one I'm be working on now is natural resources. So, you'll see that >> back from 19 is only six years old. >> Yeah. We do have a section in there about electric vehicles. >> Yeah. >> Revamped the entire thing. Okay. >> Okay. >> That's about it. >> Well, I guess that's a starting point. >> It's a starting point. That's right. >> We have something in the master plan about it and then >> we have something we have an ordinance model ordinance.
100But the next obvious question is is do your solar panels charge your car? >> Yes. >> There you go. >> Heck yeah. >> Yeah, that's what I do. >> Oh, this is interesting. >> Do my pool heater. >> To become EV ready, Lichfield should consider creating a plan strategically placed EV charging station. >> My little neighbor rigged one up. We'll >> add a little solar panel. Do it on mine. Also by a quick look do uh this has made it into their regulations this year as well. >> Okay. What is a >> Well, thank you all for traveling down this rabbit hole with me. I appreciate the conversation. >> Absolutely. >> Thanks for bringing the topic. >> Always thinking. It's good. >> It's good. >> Where the hell is this? See here >> looking at
101next >> anything else Jay you have for >> I think that's all we've got >> that's everything covered we covered everything on that okay um so when we're looking at next workshop I guess >> I don't want to have anything else on our agenda >> that's coming up >> um yeah we do have a conceptual coming in October 21st for um architectural drawings for they're calling it Kobe arm >> and 3A. >> That' be a good point to ask whether or not they're considering EV charge. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, we could go to our first meeting in November. >> All right. >> Make that a workshop. >> All right. >> Okay. And I will probably have something on the master plan for that meeting, too. >> All right. >> Okay. Well, thank you,
102Jay. Thank you, Russ, everybody. >> Thank you. >> Good discussion. >> Okay. Uh committee reports. Any reports from any committees? Um Jeremy, anything on economic development? Uh, I had to missed the last one cuz I had a game to coach. Um, but I talked to um Peter from Wreck about this and he says that we are very much nearing the completion of this committee. >> Okay. >> So this month which would be in about 3 weeks we should have a final meeting for that committee. >> Okay. Um Jay, anything you would like to add about economic development? >> Uh I think no I don't think so. >> Okay. Um, NRPC anything or >> uh I mean our last meeting uh we actually had a really great presentation on the army initiative regen valley um which
103is the designated the regen valley is a designated tech hub uh federally designated around regenerative medicine and so we are in that overall territory it's actually the whole of the Manchester and Nashville area. So, it it was extremely interesting to um just kind of hear about the advances that are happening and the um you know industries are actually being born which is pretty amazing and um they're close to getting to commercialization with some of these adaptations. So, that's really pretty exciting. I think we're going to see a whole lot more of it. Um and then of course the 10-year plan. Um, so there was a fair amount of talk about that. That public hearing is tonight for our region in Hudson. Um, and so it'll be interested to see how that goes. We've got a
104few people from our office are there tonight, so we will I'm sure I'll get a report tomorrow. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, capital improvement committee met last night. Um we our next meeting is November 3rd. Uh the school presented some of their um needs for um the capital plan. Um guess we need a couple of clarifications from library and some other folks and but I think we're looking good uh for November 3rd for prioritization. So, um the uh conservation commission met last Thursday um at the fire station um and the lower Marramac Local River Advisory Committee meeting will have a meeting in October um I believe and uh Nasha City Hall and I believe it's you I think we're going back to meetings on the Um, I want to say it's the fourth Thursday of
105the month, but I I think this one is um might be on a Wednesday, but don't quote me. I think but the information for the lower Marramac I believe is on the NRPC I think on the website there and I think you can get information from the department of environmental services website on the um rivers management program uh which lists all of the LLC lac's in the state um one of the things that came up at that last LAC meeting um is um water testing um which was kind of interesting Um they guess Marramac does water testing. Nasha does water testing on the lower Marramac and interest and I know I mentioned to the conservation commission about doing that for Lichfield. So we'll see what comes of that. Um and I think that is everything
106from me. Does anybody have anything else? I did just want to add um next Thursday the 16th uh the folks at the heritage commission will be meeting in the fire station at 6:30 for the 250th celebration. Okay. Going to be all hands on deck. So anyone that's like interested in that kind of thing um willing to help out, get involved, show up. >> Great. >> Thank you. >> It's slightly related, but we'll be sending something out to all the heritage commissions. Um but there is a small grant program that is now available through I think it's a 1792 foundation it's called uh and it is for historic preservation for you know generally smaller projects. So, who knows? Maybe there's something in there about it. Okay, good. Uh, approval of the September 16th, 2025 minutes. Anybody
107have an opportunity to take a look at the minutes? And do they have any questions, amendments, um, anything that they want to address? If anybody doesn't have any uh questions or sorry, go ahead. >> I just wanted to but in real quick, maybe I misread it wrong. The state allows ADUs up to what was it? 750. I thought >> uh they all the you can't require less than 750. Okay. Um, in the statute they allow up to 900. >> Perfect. >> But a community can allow something larger than 900 if you want. >> Perfect. I misread. Apologies. [Music] >> Does anybody want to make a motion to approve the minutes? >> So moved. >> I have a motion by Russ. Uh, do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Jesse. Um, any
108further discussion? Uh, all those in I guess all those in favor of approval of the minutes for September 16, 2025 as written, um, please signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> I. >> All right. Those opposed? Anybody abstaining? I >> I >> So I guess that's >> still pass three. >> So who who who um what was the approval? Who who approved them? One >> Russ was a skeleton crew. >> Yeah. So three guess a tough day. We did. Yeah. Tough day. Okay. Right. Any other business this evening? Oh, I did res I did receive a email from Jared. He apologizes he couldn't make it tonight. He was not feeling well. So, um hope you feel well, Jared, if you're out there. Um, >> and thank you for covering for the last meeting for
109me uh in my absence. Um, any other business? Jay, do you have anything? >> I do not. >> Joan, >> no. >> Anybody have anything? >> No. >> All right. Since there's no other business this evening before the planning board, I guess I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> I guess you'll entertain. >> Unless you want to talk more charging station. >> Make a motion to adjurnn. >> All right. I have a motion by I have a second by Travis. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Those opposed, abstain. Motion passes 600. Thank you for joining us this evening. Um enjoy the rest of October and um we will see you when's the next meeting? >> 21st. on the 21st of October.