MAINE LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry 22 State House Station - Augusta, Maine 04333-0022

TEL (207) 287-2631 FAX (207) 287-7439

AGENDA – Virtual format Meeting Date: October 14, 2020 Meeting Time: 10:00 AM

Meeting Location Click here:

Or Dial In:

Join Microsoft Teams Meeting +1 207-209-4724 United States, Portland (Toll) Conference ID: 232 656 012#

Est. Time Attachment Action # Agenda Item Action Presenter

Administrative Matters 10:00 AM

5 min. Introductions – virtual meeting format None J. East

5 min. LINK September 16, 2020 Commission Meeting Minutes Acceptance

10 min. Director’s Report None J. East

Public Hearing 10:15 AM

10 min. LINK

ZP372 Amendment C

Saddleback – Overview of Revisions to D-PD for solar facility and warming hut

Discussion T. Beaucage

45 min ZP372 Amendment C

Saddleback – Public comment on Revisions to D-PD for solar facility and warming hut

Public Comment

Public

Permitting & Zoning Matters

30 min. LINK ZP779 Wolfden Mt. Chase, LLC. - Metallic Mineral Mining • Virtual Site visit; need for Field visit

Discussion/ Decision S. Beyer

20 min. LINK

Application Forms Decision B. Godsoe

Commissioner Comments

Adjourn

https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_ZmQ4YzEwMGMtZmQ2Yi00NzM3LWIzNTAtNTRjYjBhNDBlYzY0%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%22413fa8ab-207d-4b62-9bcd-ea1a8f2f864e%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2292f7466d-81aa-4a93-ac47-cb73376eaead%22%7dtel:+1%20207-209-4724,,232656012#%20https://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/agenda_items/101420/09-16-20_DraftMinutes.pdfhttps://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/agenda_items/101420/ZP372-C_HearingMaterials.pdfhttps://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/agenda_items/101420/ZP372-C_HearingMaterials.pdfhttps://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/agenda_items/101420/WolfdenPetition_CommPkt_100820.pdfhttps://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/agenda_items/101420/Commission_Memo_Revised_Application_Forms_1020.pdfhttps://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/agenda_items/101420/Commission_Memo_Revised_Application_Forms_1020.pdf

MAINE LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION Department of Agriculture, Conservation & Forestry

22 State House Station, Augusta, Maine 04333-0022 TEL (207) 287-2631 FAX (207) 287-7439

MINUTES

REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING Virtual – via Microsoft Teams

October 14, 2020; 10:00 am Start Time

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Everett Worcester, Chair James May Gwen Hilton Betsy Fitzgerald, Vice-Chair William Gilmore Peter Pray Durward Humphrey Millard Billings

STAFF PRESENT

Judy East, Executive Director Benjamin Godsoe, Chief Planner

Stacie Beyer, Planning Manager Brookelyn Gingras, Environmental Specialist (technical support)

Tina Corkum, Secretary Associate Meagan Westfall, Environmental Specialist (technical support)

Tim Beaucage, Senior Planner Ellen Jackson, GIS Coordinator (technical support)

Tim Carr, Senior Planner

OTHERS PRESENT

Lauren Parker, AAG

Note: Commission votes are recorded in the following order: number voting in favor of a motion – number voting against a motion – number abstaining – number absent

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

Introductions: Introductions were made by members of the Commission board.

Minute Approvals: Commissioner Fitzgerald moved to approve the August 12, 2020 minutes; Commissioner Pray seconded; Vote: 8-0-0-1 (Commissioner Lee was absent)

DIRECTOR’S REPORT

Director Judy East provided updates to the Commission on several subjects organized around LUPC’s continuing response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Commission and staff updates, several project updates, and what we anticipate coming before the Commission in the next few months.

COVID-19 Updates o Status quo for LUPC staff and service to public; two people now allowed per vehicleo Working on installation of plexi-glass barrier at East Millinocket office and conference room space in Ashland

(coordinating with partner agencies)

Minutes of the September 16, 2020 meeting Page 2 of 7

o Prepared virtual site visit for Commission and public for Wolfden metallic mineral mining Zoning Petition Commission Updates

o Annual election of officers completed in September 2020 with continuance of Everett Worcester as Chair and Betsy Fitzgerald as Vice-Chair.

Staff updates o Appalachian Mountain Club tour conducted yesterday, October 13 and attended by Director East and Senior

Planner Naomi-Kirk-Lawlor, the planner serving the Greenville region. Thanks to Eliza Townsend, Steve Tatko, and Susan Arnold of AMC for a great tour of the southern end of the Maine Woods Initiative, almost 100,000 acres of land under management for recreation, forestry, ecological reserve, and public access.

o We received 17 applications for the Environmental Specialist IV position vacated by Bill Hinkel; reviewed them quickly last night after the AMC tour, several appear very promising; we anticipate scheduling interviews before the end of October, with a decision hopefully by next Commission meeting.

Project updates o The public comment period on the draft work plan for the review of the new location of development and

subdivision rule changes that went into effect last year is still open. Several individuals have provided comment in writing or at a virtual public meeting on September 30th. Additional opportunities are available for input on the web site and the comment period continues until October 30. We will summarize all input at the November Commission meeting. Link to video describing the work plan.

o The Commission decided in September to grant the request of 25 petitioners to hold a public hearing on Niboban on Rangeley Lake SP 4097-D. Staff have provided detailed direction to the applicant on the materials necessary for staff to send it out for review by State agencies. However, we have not yet received these materials and, with a 30-day notice period required by Commission Rule (Ch. 4 Section 4.04 (6) (a)), we cannot hold the public hearing in November. The 30-day notice period for the public hearing will be initiated once the necessary materials are submitted. Thus, at the earliest, we anticipate the public hearing will be at the January 2021 Commission meeting.

o As noted last month and now evidenced by permitting trends, the regional offices are very busy. As of the end of September, the Commission has already exceeded the number of Building Permits processed last year and matched the number processed in 2018. In addition, the planning staff are fielding several inquiries from towns and plantations considering to either transfer regulatory authority to the Commission or to understand what is involved with a transfer of regulatory authority over land use to municipal jurisdiction. To improve the efficiency by which we respond to these and future inquiries, we have updated the web site and several informational brochures including:

▪ Buying and Selling Real Estate in the UT ▪ Culvert Sizing Guide ▪ Accessory structure brochure ▪ Information available from the LUPC

Upcoming calendar

o November Meeting ▪ Report on Location of Development outreach meetings and web survey ▪ Report on Chapter 1 Rulemaking Public Hearing record (closes Oct 24) ▪ Likely Settlement Agreement EC 01-23 Timothy Albart’s sister (new owner) Cross Lake Twp Aroostook

County. ▪ Buckhorn Camps Pre-application Meeting with the Commission

o No December meeting anticipated o January meeting

▪ Preview of Annual Reports to Legislature

https://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/projects/location_of_development/lod_current_process.htmlhttps://www.maine.gov/tools/whatsnew/index.php?topic=lurcfiles&id=2819&v=tplfileshttps://www.maine.gov/tools/whatsnew/index.php?topic=lurcfiles&id=3481846&v=tplfileshttps://www.maine.gov/tools/whatsnew/index.php?topic=lurcfiles&id=419262&v=tplfiles

Minutes of the September 16, 2020 meeting Page 3 of 7

▪ Niboban SP 4097-D Public Hearing ▪ Schedule Chapter 4 for public comment?

PUBLIC HEARING

Saddleback – Overview of Revisions to D-PD for solar facility and warming hut - Tim Beaucage

The presiding officer called the public hearing to order at 10:15 AM and conducted a rollcall of Commissioners present. Tim Beaucage provided a brief overview of the zoning petition and identified the applicable review criteria, both of which were also available in digital form for attendees. Judy East provided an explanation of how the virtual hearing would be conducted. The presiding officer summarized the purpose of the public hearing and called upon the petitioner to make a brief statement. Tom Federle, representative for Arctaris Saddleback Company LLC. (the Petitioner), summarized the purpose of the petition and the new development opportunities it would provide. Generally the petition proposes to enable development that would increase lodge capacity and significantly reduce high energy costs associated with snowmaking and operation of the lifts – two of three key factors to the long-term success and economic viability of the resort. Tom noted that engineers had identified three other sites suited to the solar development; however, these sites would have resulted in the solar development being too prominent visually. Instead, a fourth site was selected, and while it is least productive, this final site minimizes visual impacts, avoids sensitive resources, and avoids conflicts with adjacent uses. The mid-mountain facility has been sited proximate to upper terminal of new lift and trails, will include a living roof, and other steps to best fit within the existing resources.

Tom confirmed that the Petitioner has been working with stakeholders and resource agencies to avoid impacts and often incorporating recommendations to address concerns. Currently, examples include modifying designs to locate security fencing off-ground, glass reducing avian impacts; matching preservation of Bicknell’s Thrush habitat. Commissioner Worcester noted that commissioners received a series of questions posed by the Appalachian Mountain Club (MATC), suggested that they be posted on the Commission’s website, and asked in any commissioners had any questions for the Petitioner. Commissioner Worcester inquired whether the Petitioner had considered locating the solar energy generation facility off-site, and if not, why not? Mr. Federle confirmed that off-site options were considered, including participation in a project in the Carrabassett Valley. However, these alternatives precluded opportunities for ownership, guiding the siting, and most critically, they would not provide the financial benefits necessary to address the energy cost issue central to the economic viability of the facility. Commissioner Hilton confirmed that, consistent with past agency decisions, there should be some consideration for the visual impacts to visitors on the Appalachian Trail. She also noted that in the past, staff have provided responses to questions such as these which have been posed by a formal party, and hoped that would be the case here too. Judy confirmed that there would be staff analysis, but due to the timing of the questions being posed and the hearing, staff prioritized distribution of the materials. Tom Federle confirmed that the Petitioner has been sensitive to the visual impacts, which is why they have engaged a visual impact assessment consultant and devoted the time to identify the best site. Specifically, that process led to moving the solar development away from the recommended sites, which were in line with Saddleback Lake, to a portion of the property where the development would have a significantly less prominent visual presence within the viewshed. He went on to highlight that the solar energy development will allow the resort to displace the power produced by fossil fuels with renewable energy, which most users of the Appalachian Trail will recognize. The Commission’s rules consider visual impacts from lakes and public roads. The proposal before the

Minutes of the September 16, 2020 meeting Page 4 of 7

Commission will not visible from Saddleback Lake or any public roads; however, while the proposal minimizes the visual impacts, it is unavoidable that it will be visible from higher elevations. Commissioner Worcester inquired about the length of the Appalachian Trail’s exposure along the ridgeline. Tom Federle noted that the solar site would be visible when ascending from the south sporadically over one and a half to two miles between the summit of Saddleback Mountain and The Horn. Tony Barrett, representative for the Maine Appalachian Mountain Club (MATC) provided testimony, noting that Saddleback Mountain is the longest stretch of ridge rock in Maine until Katahdin Mountain. The National Park Service (NPS) maintains a database of viewpoints. In Maine, Saddleback Mountain offers views from tree line to tree line along the more than three mile ridgeline, though the project site would be visible within one and half miles. In 2016, the NPS instituted an “Enjoy the View” initiative which resulted in the Visual Resource Inventory (VRI). In 2019 the NPS conducted a VRI in four locations along the Appalachian Trail, one of those locations was Saddleback Mountain. The VRI employs uniform protocols regarding pictures and observations captured. Tony illustrated photographs from the ridgeline of the landscape to the North and West, identifying discordant features noted in the petition and ultimately posing the question whether a 35-acre solar array located three miles away and tilted toward the ridgeline, become a dominant feature on the landscape. Noting the importance of shifting toward renewable energy, and highlighting the economic value of Saddleback Resort to the region, the MATC suggest that there are alternative approaches. Tony described recent changes to Maine law have enabled the siting of solar energy projects at off-site locations, and highlighted several projects, entities, and consumer programs that have taken advantage of the new flexibility. Ultimately, the MATC requests that in considering this proposal to change a working forest into a commercial power enterprise, that the Commission consider alternatives to that and the impacts it would have upon the Appalachian Trail. Commissioner Hilton asked whether the MATC had photographs that show a similar sized project in a similar location, or whether such information is part of the record? Tony confirmed that was a question the MATC has posed. He noted that the photo-rendering submitted with as part of the petition provides some value in this regard, but is not a sufficient substitute for photographs or photo-simulations. Commissioner Hilton inquired whether the projects identified by the MATC were required to submit photo-simulations as viewed from the Appalachian Trail. Tony noted that photo-simulations were part of the NECEC and several wind energy development review processes. Commissioner Fitzgerald inquired about the construction timeline for the solar energy generation facility, if the zoning petition were to be approved. Tom Federle noted that construction would be summer of 2021, with a goal of operation by the end of 2021. Tim Beaucage confirmed that in addition to an approved zoning petition, the owner would be required to then apply for and be granted permit approval for actual construction. Commissioner Worcester sought confirmation that if the zoning petition were to be approved by the Commission, that permits would be acted upon by staff. Tim confirmed that has been past practice, but that the Commission could direct staff to offer recommendations for Commission action or direction. Mark Johnson, a property owner in Sandy River Plantation, and a member of Saddleback Advisory Board, offered the advisory board’s support for both the mid-mountain lodge and solar facility. The best outcome for the community will come about through a Saddleback business model that is both profitable and forward thinking; the current upgraded chair lift, and the proposed mid-mountain facility and the solar energy facility seek to implement that business model.

Minutes of the September 16, 2020 meeting Page 5 of 7

Commissioner Gilmore sought confirmation that if the zoning petition were to be approved, the solar and mid-mountain facilities would be listed as permitted uses. Tim Beaucage affirmed. Commissioner Gilmore went on to express support for a successful resort and yet mindful that the Commission must ensure that the revitalization is achieved well – both individually and collectively. He went on to ask staff whether solar energy facilities or any development within the D-PD could be allowed as conditional uses. Tim confirmed that due to the nature of the Planned Development (D-PD) Subdistrict, use listings are customized and often narrative in nature, therefore uses can and are described in a manner similar to conditional uses. Further, zoning petitions approving D-PDs have included conditions [similar to permit conditions] which may serve similar purposes. Judy East confirmed that the questions raised by the MATC were posted in the meeting chat, and the on the FTP site with the full record. Commissioner Worcester sought confirmation whether the MATC had any concerns regarding the mid-mountain facility. Tony Barrett noted that the MATC also has concerns that the mid-mountain facility will be visible from The Horn, but chose to focus on the solar facility today. However, upon becoming aware of the work between the Petitioner and Maine Audubon has been reassuring to the MATC, including the sighting of the project, building design, and materials. Tom Federle responded to MATC comments regarding other projects in Maine. Notably the Bowdoin and Colby examples are not appropriate comparisons due to their sizable endowments of long-standing institutions versus the need to turn around the economic stability of the resort that has been closed for five years. Further, Tom stressed the disparity in economic effect between buying into a project being developed by other parties versus developing a separate facility. Due to unresolved technical difficulties, Maine Audubon (MA) was not able to provide their testimony orally; Judy East read aloud MA’s testimony on their behalf. MA offers their general enthusiasm for the potential of the project to engender a conservation ethic in their guests. However, there are significant concerns regarding the potential impacts of the mid-mountain facility upon the imperiled Bicknell’s Thrush, a species suffering steady population declines and loss of high-elevation habitat. The mid-mountain facility posses impacts or threats by permanently displacing habitat, creating four-season activity around the facility, and the high risks of bird mortality due to birds striking the window glass. Notably, glass windows are dangerous to birds because they appear invisible, either by reflecting sky or surrounding vegetation, or when lit from within – in both cases birds collide with the window believing they are flying to a perch or into the air. MA recommends that the mid-mountain facility should not be permitted; however, if allowed to proceed, MA recommends several design elements to mitigate the impacts to the Bicknell’s Thrush. Because no other individuals wished to speak, the presiding officer confirmed the deadlines for comments and the where comments should be sent, then closed the public hearing at 11:48 AM.

PERMITTING & ZONING MATTER

Wolfden Mt. Chase, LLC – Metallic Mineral Mining – Virtual Site Visit; need for Field Visit - Stacie Beyer

Stacie Beyer presented a virtual site visit to Wolfden Mt. Chase, LLC.’s proposed Planned Development Subdistrict (D-PD) for the Pickett Mountain Mine. The virtual site visit was arranged in response to a Commission request at its September 2020 business meeting, and was a collaboration of Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry (DACF), as well as Wolfden staff. The DACF team included staff from the Commissioner’s Office, the Maine Forest Service, and the Land Use Planning Commission. Stacie conveyed appreciation to everyone that helped on the development of the first LUPC virtual site visit. After the showing of the virtual site visit video, Stacie recognized that there were some connectivity issues

Minutes of the September 16, 2020 meeting Page 6 of 7

during the showing and explained that the video is part of the agency record and will be posted on the Commission’s webpage for the project.

Next, Stacie requested guidance on whether the Commission would like to hold an in-person site visit to the proposed D-PD location. Commissioner Worcester commented that at the last Commission meeting several Commissioners expressed the opinion that it would be easier to understand if they could see the site for themselves.

Commissioner Hilton expressed appreciation for the virtual tour and stated that she found it very helpful. However, she indicated that she would like to have an in-person site visit.

Commissioner Fitzgerald indicated support for an in-person site visit, stating that an in-person site visit would provide more of a sense of proportions. She agreed that the virtual site visit was helpful, but she still didn’t have a sense of the expansiveness of the proposal.

Commissioner Humphrey expressed his interest in having a site visit in that it would provide more in-depth information. He commented that the virtual site visit was nice, but that putting boots on the ground would be different.

Commissioner Billings agreed that the video was a big help, but indicated, if there is an opportunity, he would still like to see the location in person.

Commissioner Worcester shared that when he first started with the Commission, the Commission spent 3 days in New Brunswick looking at mines, including the mine with the portal shown in the virtual site visit video. He believes the New Brunswick mine is similar, and stated that he has seen that mine, the tailings site, and the water facilities. He concluded that he didn’t need an in-person site visit.

There was a general discussion on the date for an in-person site visit, including Commissioners’ availability around the dates of October 21st and October 22nd. Commissioner Billings asked if there was anything more to see, other than what was shown on the video. Stacie explained that there is a network of existing land management roads, and some activity associated with mineral exploration onsite, but most of the area is forested. Stacie further explained that most of the infrastructure and areas proposed for development was captured on the video.

Commissioner Humphrey explained that he is more concerned about seeing the existing topography, slopes and grades, which the video doesn’t give you a good feel for.

Jeremy Ouellette of Wolfden also commented that an in-person site visit would provide an opportunity to see the proposed location in relation to the nearby towns and neighbors. He felt the drive out to the property is important as well as seeing the site itself. He also agreed with the value of seeing the topography, lay of the land, and scale. He stated that Wolfden is open to any dates that the Commission would like to visit.

Commissioner Gilmore added his interest in going to the site.

Given the schedules of the Commissioners, Commissioner Worcester suggested having two days for the site visit. Stacie requested Lauren Parker’s input on the question of two days. Lauren indicated that it could be a possibility because the same rules would apply to both days. However, she noted that it would be important to make sure that both groups see the same things. All the Commissioners need to have the same information. Lauren felt one day would be better, but if that isn’t possible and there are two separate days, any appropriate questions that are asked through staff and the answers to those questions would need to be shared with both groups. She further noted that all of that would be documented in the site visit memorandum so that all the questions and answers would be available to all Commissioners, interested persons and parties, the applicant, and the public.

Minutes of the September 16, 2020 meeting Page 7 of 7

Stacie offered, if there is an interest in two days, that is helpful and what makes the most sense is to poll all the Commissioners outside of the meeting for which day works bests for them. Commissioner Worcester agreed to that approach.

PERMITTING & ZONING MATTER

Application Forms – T. Carr

Senior Planner Tim Carr provided an overview of a staff redesign of the Zoning Petition, Nonresidential Development Permit, and Subdivision Permit application forms carried out by Tim, Chief Planner Ben Godsoe, and Planning Manager Stacie Beyer. Tim outlined the goals in redesigning the application forms, listing the priority goals for improving the experience of applicants in filling out the forms and the experience of staff in processing and maintaining the forms. Tim also reviewed the strategies that were used to meet the goals and then covered the five parts of the redesigned application structure, explaining in each part how aspects of the redesign provide benefits for applicants and staff. Particular design elements that were highlighted included: a cover sheet for applicant orientation that works with all three redesigned forms; the introduction of fillable forms and tables; an exhibit list; a simple and consistent format for exhibit instructions; larger fonts, more whitespace, and decreased verbiage to make reading the instructions easier; and internal links to aid navigation. Tim then explained the processes by which the redesigned forms were reviewed by Commission staff and external reviewers as well as the current field-testing of the redesigned forms. Lastly, Tim provided information on what is next for this project, including: further revisions this winter based on the results of field testing; rolling these three redesigned forms out in 2021; shifting focus to redesigning the Residential Building Permit Application; redesigning the webpages on which forms are available for greater public accessibility; updating and creating public guidance materials; and creating staff review checklists to aid in application processing. This ended the presentation. Commissioner Fitzgerald commented on the Notice of Filing Exhibit which had been used as an example in Tim’s presentation. She suggested that UT administrators for the counties be added to the list of people receiving notice when Zoning Petitions, Nonresidential Development Permit applications, and Subdivision Permit applications are filed. Commissioner Hilton commented on how the improvements to the design would greatly help applicants and thanked staff for their work on this project.

ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at approximately 12:30 pm.

STATE OF MAINE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION & FORESTRY

LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION 22 STATE HOUSE STATION

AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0022 JANET T. MILLS

GOVERNOR

AMANDA E. BEAL COMMISSIONER

JUDY C. EAST EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

HARLOW BUILDING, 4TH FLOOR PHONE: 207-287-2631 WWW.MAINE.GOV/DACF/LUPC FAX: 207-287-7439

Memorandum To: LUPC Commissioners

CC: Judy C. East, Executive Director

From: Stacie R. Beyer, Planning Manager

Date: October 8, 2020

Re: Commission Site Visit, Wolfden Mt. Chase, LLC., Zoning Petition ZP 779

Introduction The Maine Land Use Planning Commission received a zoning petition on January 27, 2020, submitted by Wolfden Mt. Chase, LLC (Wolfden) to rezone land they own in T6 R6 WELS to a Planned Development Subdistrict (D-PD). The proposed purpose of the D-PD subdistrict is for an underground metallic mineral mine and associated buildings and infrastructure. The zoning petition, ZP 779, is subject to the Commission’s Chapter 12 rules (Mining and Level C Mineral Exploration Activities). At the September 2020 Commission meeting, the Commission discussed four options for a site visit to the proposed D-PD subdistrict location: an in-person site visit with public participation, an in-person site visit without public participation, a virtual site visit, and a combined virtual and in-person site visit. The Commission directed staff to arrange a virtual site visit and present the footage for viewing at the October meeting. The Commission expressed an interest in discussing the possibility of an in-person site visit after the Commission reviews the virtual site visit. Staff will present a virtual site visit at the Commission’s October meeting. This virtual site visit is part of the record and available to the public. Virtual and In-Person Site Visit The virtual site visit includes material from several sources. The Maine Forest Service flew drones over the proposed D-PD subdistrict location on September 28, 2020 and October 7, 2020. All the drone footage is part of the record for the proceeding, and excerpts will be used in the virtual site visit. On October 2, Wolfden and LUPC staff conducted a site visit that was captured with video and still shots taken by Jim Britt, DACF Communications Director, that will also be included in the virtual site visit. Additionally, Google Earth images will be included for orientation purposes. Commission staff would like to express our appreciation to Maine Forest Service staff and to Jim Britt for their assistance on this project. In viewing the virtual site visit, you will notice that there is activity occurring at the site. Wolfden has been conducting metallic mineral exploration on their property for several years. Level A and level B mineral

http://www.maine.gov/dacfhttp://www.maine.gov/dacf/lupc/laws_rules/rule_chapters/Chapter12_ver2013.pdf

Commission Memo, ZP779 October 8, 2020 Page 2 of 2

exploration is an allowed use without a permit subject to standards in the General Management Subdistrict. The standards for mineral exploration are contained in the Commission’s Chapter 13 rules. Following presentation of the virtual site visit, staff request guidance on whether the Commission would like to schedule an in-person site visit to the proposed D-PD subdistrict location. The Commission has discussed possibly holding the site visit on October 21 or 22. If the Commission decides to hold an in-person site visit without public participation, given the safety considerations discussed at the September Commission meeting, Commission staff will prepare a memo for the record that includes an itinerary, map, and details on any questions asked and the answers provided during the visit. Ex Parte Communications Prohibited Because the Commission is holding a public hearing on ZP 779, the Commission's Chapter 5 rule prohibiting ex parte communications, 01-072 C.M.R. ch, 5 § 5.25(2), applies to ZP 779, including any in-person site visit. Therefore, if Commissioners attend an in-person site visit, there must be no discussion between the petitioner, including petitioner's representatives, and the Commission regarding Wolfden’s proposal, ZP 779, including any issue of fact, law, or procedure. Discussions between Commissioners and persons other than Commission staff regarding ZP 779 may occur only during a public meeting, such as the Commission’s monthly business meetings or at a public hearing. During the site visit, representatives of Wolfden and Commission staff may point out various features and locations relevant to the Wolfden Rezoning Petition. Commissioners and Wolfden representatives may speak directly to Commission staff with questions or comments about ZP 779, such as site-specific questions for clarification. Staff will then follow up as appropriate. As stated above, any such questions and responses will be reflected in the memo prepared by Commission staff to document an in-person site visit. Attachments: Attachment A: Location Map Attachment B: Revised Preliminary Site Plan with Ore Body Attachment C: Map of Virtual Site Visit

Location Map of Proposed Project

Attachment A

Doc

umen

t: P

:\Pro

ject

s\W

olfd

en R

esou

rces

\4.0

_Del

iver

able

s\4.

5_D

atab

ases

\GIS

\Map

Doc

umen

ts\P

erm

it A

pp U

pdat

e Ju

n202

0\P

erm

it_A

pp_E

_Jun

2020

_22x

34LS

.mxd

P

DF:

P:\P

roje

cts\

Wol

fden

Res

ourc

es\4

.0_D

eliv

erab

les\

4.5_

Dat

abas

es\G

IS\F

igur

es\P

erm

it A

pp U

pdat

e Ju

n202

0\A

ttach

men

t E.p

df

07-

01-2

020

11:

08 A

M

bria

n.pe

ters

Image Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

0 400200Feet¯

LEGENDArea Proposed for RezoningEast and west limbs of thegeologic or economic depositInfrastructureRoads

PROTECTION SUBDISTRICTSP-GP: Great PondP-SL2: Shoreland - 75'P-WL1: Wetlands of Special SignificanceP-WL2: Scrub-shrub WetlandsP-WL3: Forested Wetlands

Attachment

Prepared/Date: BRP 07-01-20 Checked/Date: PHT 07-01-20

Attachment B

Wolfden Rezoning Petition, ZP 779 Map of proposed O-PO subdistrict and stops on the virtual site visit.

Legend

(il Concentrator @ Easternmost PDP Ci Laydown Area @ Road Thru TMF @ Tip of TMF Near E. POP 00 We stern-most POP 0 Wolfden_dpd

Attachment C

10-14-20 AgendaMAINE LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSIONAttachmentAgenda ItemPresenter

Introductions – virtual meeting formatSeptember 16, 2020 Commission Meeting MinutesDirector’s ReportSaddleback – Overview of Revisions to D-PD for solar facility and warming hutSaddleback – Public comment on Revisions to D-PD for solar facility and warming hut Wolfden Mt. Chase, LLC. - Metallic Mineral Mining Virtual Site visit; need for Field visit Application Forms

WolfdenPetition_CommPkt_100820Commission MemoWolfden_LocationMapPreliminary Site Plan With Ore BodyMap of Virtual Site Visit