Chair, Carol Billington, called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
Members present: Gus Favreau, Wayne Newbegin, Eleanor Dudek, Peter Walker and Bill Foster. Absent: Brian Libby. Staff present: Bud Benson and Donna Sawyer.
Carol asked for approval of the August 7, 2006 minutes. Wayne Newbegin made a motion to approve the minutes as typed and Eleanor Dudek seconded the motion. There was no discussion; all in favor. Motion carried.
Carol moved to the reading of the Findings of Fact. Wayne Newbegin made a motion to waive the reading of the Finding of Facts and Eleanor Dudek seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion passed.
Wayne Newbegin made a motion to accept the Finding of Fact for:
-COTTAGE SETBACK/Larry and Suzanne White at Map 48, Lot 2, 15 Harbor View Way.
and Gus Favreau seconded the motion.
Gus Favreau made a motion to accept the Finding of Fact for:
-BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL OFFICE UNDER 2,000 S.F./Tower Publishing, Mike Lyons at Map 3, Lot 36 at 588 Saco Road
and Wayne Newbegin seconded the motion. All in favor and motion carried. Carol signed both Findings of Fact.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
01-12-01-03 WILDLANDS CLUSTER SUBDIVISION PHASE 2/BUSQUE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., - MAP 12, LOT 1, BOUNDARY ROAD
Subdivision Plan Review
Charlie Brown, Project Manager at Sebago Technics, was present to update the Planning Board Members of progress on the project. He said that last spring they submitted an application to the DEP. One point brought up was the possibility of vernal pools on the site. In late May, Mr. Brown met with representatives from DEP, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and EPA, other members from Sebago Technics and Mr. Busque. After a review of the two areas in question, it was determined that they were significant habitat and should be protected from development. This finding affected about 60 acres of the property and they have been working with DEP, Inland Fisheries & Wildlife, and EPA as to how to develop that real estate. A copy of the original overview plan was submitted to DEP and a potential layout
with the vernal pool in the protected areas for review. Mr. Brown displayed a site plan for the new layout of the entire development. The areas shaded in blue were the areas with vernal pools of significant value. The 2 areas with significant change are Estes Drive and Granby Way and the lots around those areas. Mr. Brown believed that everyone had agreed to in theory and they were pursuing the engineering to develop the adjustments.
He pointed out the 2 vernal pools and said that the EPA restricts a 100’ non disturbed buffer around the pools. The plan showed that area in green around the pools. That area has to stay in its natural state for the protection of the spotted lizard and the small tree frog found in the areas. The EPA also requires a 650’ buffer around that area with only 25% of the area for development. Mr. Brown showed where Estes Drive had been moved in an easterly direction, the terminus of it is approximately 300’ easterly of its original location.
Granby Way used to come off Estes and come off the back of the site with a cul-de-sac on a knoll west of the pond area. That road has now been moved in a southwesterly direction a considerable distance and the lots have been reconfigured around the area. Mr. Brown explained that it has been quite a process negotiating with the various environmental groups as to how to develop the area. He felt the property was large enough so that the developer could still maintain the 116 proposed lots.
Mr. Brown stated they are working with Portland Water District and they believe with upgrades at the Steep Falls’ pump station and a booster pump onsite that they will be able to service this project. They are working with the Public Utilities Commission to develop a letter which will allow the project to move forward with the DEP. That letter will be furnished to the Town when it becomes available. Carol asked if there were questions. She stated that a site walk should be conducted because of the relocation of the streets. Mr. Brown said that everything should be marked by the first of October if the members would like to do a site walk. There is access to the back of the site because of logging on the abutting lot.
Mr. Benson said that the land ownership issue with an abutter has been resolved.
01-05-02-05 JOSIE’S BROOK SUBDIVISION (formerly known as Tompson Property)/James Tompson, QTW, Inc. – Map 6, Lots 18 & 21, 139 Cape Road
Subdivision Plan Review
Wayne Newbegin made a motion to table the project until next month and Peter Walker seconded the motion. Bud Benson, Planning Administrator, said that FEMA had requested more information that has been forwarded. Everyone is waiting for the approval now. All in Favor and motion carried.
01-05-01-06 GRAVEL EXTRACTION/R. J. Grondin & Sons – Map 9, Lot 15, 295 Middle Road
Gravel Pit Expansion
Shawn Frank, Sebago Technics, was present to update the Board Members on progress of this project. He said there was a public hearing being held later in the meeting regarding rezoning some of the shoreland along Little Watchic Pond. That change is integral to the R. J. Grondin’s amended site plan for gravel pit expansion.
Chair, Carol Billington, asked for a motion to table. Eleanor Dudek made a motion to table until next month and Wayne Newbegin seconded the motion. All in favor and motion carried.
BEECHWOOD SUBDIVISION/Design Dwellings, Inc. – Map 6, Lot 89D, 270 Bonny Eagle Road
10 Lot Cluster Subdivision Plan Review
Shawn Frank, Engineer at Sebago Technics, and Susan Duchaine, President of Design Dwellings, were present to discuss this proposed subdivision.
Carol Billington stated that Bud Benson, Planning Board Administrator, had written extensive notes in his memo to the members. Shawn showed a plan prepared for the 30 acre site that is bisected by a residential zone across the back of the lot. Shawn pointed out Rte #35 and the two abutters, the Sturgis residence and the Pierce residence. All have been working on a layout that will, hopefully, get the roadway away from the Sturgis residence and allows the project to use the existing driveway which the Pierce’s are using now. Then the Pierces can have a driveway off the new roadway.
Mr. Frank said there had been considerable discussion about net residential area calculations. In fact, his interpretation of a certain segment of the zoning ordinance has been resolved. Mr. Benson received on 9/11/06 CAD files showing revised net residential area calculations and has it very close for 10 to 11 lots. There are some additional wetlands on site and those have been survey located. A lot line has been adjusted with an abutter and Mr. Frank felt that there is enough land now for 11 subdivision lots. Open space surrounds the property including the majority of the wetland areas that have been identified on the site. The roadway is proposed to be constructed to town standards and will be offered to the town as a public roadway.
Alec Drive enters the subdivision and ends with a cul-de-sac. The project will be serviced by underground utilities, electric and telephone and each lot will have an individual well and private septic systems. He has met with DEP and reviewed the overall stormwater because this is in the Bonny Eagle Pond watershed. Phosphorus will be controlled with a pond located in the open space and another one up at the axis of the road. The pond at the entrance might also be used for a fire pond and Mr. Frank acknowledged that the Standish Fire Chief may have an issue with this fire pond. Mr. Frank stated he will be meeting with the Fire Chief in an effort to resolve the issue.
Shawn Frank opened discussion to the Board and the public. He asked for preliminary approval tonight. Wayne Newbegin asked if deeds had been exchanged with the abutters and they have no dispute with this layout. They had not been exchanged yet and Mr. Frank said that Mr. & Mrs. Sturgis could address their issues because they were in the audience tonight. Carol Billington said that there will be a peer review of this project and that review will begin once the escrow account has been set up and the project receives preliminary approval. Mr. Benson said that Mr. Tubbs has been out once to walk the site to review original wetland delineation but he hasn’t made any written comments yet on the site.
Chair, Carol Billington, asked for public comment and Jim Sturgis approached the podium. He said that he doesn’t have a problem with the development. He wanted the location of the pond to be looked at and questioned the need for it because 3/10th of a mile away is a pond. He felt public water will go by the subdivision some day soon. He wasn’t crazy about having a pond situated there and he did not want to hold up the project approval.
Susan Duchaine approached the podium and said that Mr. Pierce has a copy of the plan being reviewed tonight. Mr. Pierce’s lawyers are reviewing the legal descriptions now. Ms. Duchaine had closed on the property but hasn’t done land swaps with abutters yet.
Carol Billington said she was uncomfortable with having a subdivision with another zone along the back. Carol wanted that issue reviewed. Susan Duchaine gave a brief history of the zoning issues she has faced. Carol asked if there was enough net residential area to carve out 11 lots. Mr. Benson said this new plan received this morning and seen by the Board tonight has a minor lot change in the northerly corner and he hadn’t checked the numbers yet. Mr. Benson said the zoning district boundaries are broad brush and they were drawn to be in somewhat straight lines. This line follows other boundary lines, but Mr. Benson thought there was enough area for 11 house lots. Mr. Benson said the fire tank issue should be addressed because the Standish Fire Chief said that he would
require a fire tank on this subdivision. There isn’t a perennial stream there to build a fire pond out there. He said there was one that passes through the culvert where this road enters onto Route 35, there is a stream that begins there but location of the actual pond doesn’t collect the runoff through that culvert, it is collecting runoff from the proposed road. Mr. Frank and Ms. Duchaine need to meeting with the Fire Chief and he is saying that he wants a fire tank. Mr. Frank said that the DEP would not allow a stream go into a pond. Mr. Frank said they would be happy to meet with the Standish Fire Chief and they would work out an agreeable plan with the Fire Chief. Ms. Duchaine said she would follow the ordinance. Eleanor asked if there was another location for a fire pond especially since the Sturgis’s concerns were to move the location of the pond. Ms. Duchaine said there would be a pond at that location, even
if it wasn’t a fire pond.
Mr. Frank said he would have some kind of pond for stormwater treatment associates with roadway construction. Mr. Frank further stated he will sit with the Chief to come to some kind of resolution.
Carol asked about leaving a future right of way to landlocked land behind this subdivision. The topic was discussed at length at workshop and she asked why there wasn’t a right of way. Mr. Frank said that he would show that right of way. He would work something out, but didn’t realize it was a requirement. Mr. Newbegin said there was access from Spear Road. Carol had 2 issues: one was when do you start the dead end street length calculation. Bud said it wouldn’t affect the net residential calculation. Finally, Carol asked if there were other issues mentioned in Bud’s memo that Ms. Duchaine or Mr. Frank wanted to discuss. Both said they were willing to refine the issues still unresolved.
Carol said that the Board had to make a public finding to see if the subdivision met the intent of the cluster subdivision ordinance. Then the Board needs to identify the conditions for a preliminary approval, i.e., peer review, street light impact fee, receipt of some missing items, fire tank to be left to the Fire Chief, future right of way shown on plan. Carol asked for more questions. Wayne Newbegin asked about fire pond versus fire tank and does the Chief have the authority to settle the fire protection decision. Ms. Duchaine said that she would make sure that the pond held water and Mr. Benson briefly talked about other issues associated with a pond.
Carol said there was another issue and that was the 100 ft. setback on the front. It was not going to be addressed because the intent of the ordinance is met because this subdivision doesn’t abut the street and because buffer already exists there.
Carol asked for a vote to determine if the subdivision met the intent of the cluster subdivision ordinance. Carol read the cluster subdivision, section 181-27B 1-9. Eleanor Dudek made a motion that the subdivision meets the intended cluster and Wayne Newbegin seconded the motion. All in favor, motion carried. Carol asked if the project was ready for preliminary approval tonight. Wayne Newbegin made a motion to grant preliminary approval with the conditions as set forth in Bud Benson’s memo to the Board Members. Bill Foster seconded the motion. All in favor and motion carried. The preliminary conditions of approval are:
1. Applicant needs to redo location map per code.
2. Show property line between abutting back lots. Show topography between proposed lot # 0 and existing duplex. Contours should extend beyond the property line even if only USGS information.
3. Please provide deed restriction and homeowner’s documentation suitable for town attorney review.
4. Plans should show wetlands as delineated per ground survey, not GPS, and modify net residential area calculations per result.
5. Show a future right of way to adjacent undeveloped land.
6. Modification of road cross section detail. Base pavement must be shown 3” wider than surface, and surface slope at 3/8”/ft.
7. Please provide evidence of acceptable quality and quantity of potable water.
8. Because this is in a pond watershed, detailed erosion and sediment control plans will be reviewed closely. Please provide and erosion control plan.
9. Fire Chief and applicant will come to an agreement on use of a fire pond or fire tank.
10. Note 18 must be changed per Sally Daggett’s memo.
11. A $1,800 street light impact fee should be assessed.
12. Please confirm that the existing duplex driveway culvert is sized adequately to handle the 25 year storm event of the upstream watershed.
01-08-07-06 COTTAGE SETBACK/Howard & Jeanne Boyden – Map 50, Lot 28, 11 Ward’s Cove Road
Shoreland Zoning Review
Carol Billington reminded the members that the planning board’s role in this approval is to insure that this cottage is back from the water to the greatest practical extent. The members conducted a site walk last month for the project. Wayne Newbegin, Gus Favereau and Bud Benson attended the site walk. Wayne Newbegin said that the Boyden’s cottage couldn’t be moved back and he made a motion to grant this applicant approval to place a new foundation under the cottage. Gus Favreau seconded the motion. Carol asked for discussion and Bud Benson, Planning Administrator, said he provided comments in his memo to the Board. His #3 recommendation should read: “proposed setback from seasonal high water elevation of 266.5 is 52’ 3” and the front
setback from Wards Cove Road is 12’ 8”. These numbers come from Mr. Boyden’s site plan submitted to the Code Enforcement Officer.
Chair, Carol Billington, asked for comments from the public. There was none. Carol asked for a vote. All in favor and motion passed with the conditions of approval as follows:
1) Planning Board approval is limited to structure setbacks to the maximum practical extent and the approval is limited in duration to a period 6 months from date of approval.
2) Lot is grandfathered with 20 ft. front and 10 ft. side setbacks. No portion of the proposed new structure may intrude further into these front and side setbacks than the existing building.
3) Existing and proposed setback from seasonal high water elevation of 266.5 is approximately 52 ft. 3 inches and the front setback from Wards Cove Road is 12 ft. 8 inches. Setback distances were obtained from applicant’s submitted “Boyden property plot plan”.
4) Applicant’s camp appears to be within the 100-year flood plain and will need to prove to the CEO that the lowest floor is 1 ft above the 100-year flood elevation.
5) Stormwater infiltration plan to be submitted by applicant and approved by CEO.
6) Erosion & sediment control plan to be submitted by applicant and approved by CEO.
7) This approval is dependent upon, and limited to, the proposals and plans contained in the application and supporting documents submitted and affirmed by the applicant (either orally or in writing) and that any variation from the plans, proposals, and supporting documents are subject to review and approval by the Planning Board, except for minor changes which the Code Enforcement Officer may approve.
COTTAGE SETBACK/Thomas P. Shaw – Map 59, Lot 3, 118 Stuart Shores Rd
Shoreland Zoning Review
Thomas Shaw came forward and said he was seeking approval to destroy his cottage and rebuild. Carol Billington said she did not go on the site walk and she referred to Wayne Newbegin to speak about the results of the site walk. Mr. Newbegin said the slope of the land, a septic system and a manhole pump station located in back of the existing cottage hindered moving the cottage. Mr. Shaw submitted new plans showing the new setbacks showing the footprint of the cottage at 6 ft. from the septic tank.
Carol Billington asked for a motion and Gus Favreau made a motion to approve this request with the submission of a new plan received by the Town on August 23, 2006 showing new setbacks. Wayne Newbegin seconded the motion. There was no public comment. All in favor and motion carried. Conditions of approval are:
1) Planning Board approval of this “Existing Conditions Plan THOMAS P SHAW” by Philip Reed Professional Land Surveyor dated May 31, 2006, with revision showing proposed condition, received at town office Aug 23, 2006, is limited to structure setbacks to the maximum practical extent and the approval is limited in duration to a period 6 months from date of approval.
2) Existing camp and deck with seasonal high water setbacks of 44.8 ft. and 64.49’ respectively are to be removed. A new proposed dwelling and deck is to be built with setbacks of 50.5’ and 65’ respectively as shown on the plan.
3) Applicant’s camp appears to be within the 100-year flood plain and will need to prove to the CEO that the lowest floor is 1 ft above the 100-year flood elevation.
4) Stormwater infiltration plan to be submitted by applicant and approved by CEO.
5) Erosion & sediment control plan to be submitted by applicant and approved by CEO.
6) This approval is dependent upon, and limited to, the proposals and plans contained in the application and supporting documents submitted and affirmed by the applicant (either orally or in writing) and that any variation from the plans, proposals, and supporting documents are subject to review and approval by the Planning Board, except for minor changes which the Code Enforcement Officer may approve.
03-08-07-06 RETAIL BUSINESS UNDER 2,000 S.F./Jeffrey S. Nemet – Map 35, Lot 23, 41 Ossipee Trail West
Site Plan Amendment
Jeff Nemet was present to discuss his project asking for approval for an antique shop at 41 Ossipee Trail West. Chair, Carol Billington, said the project was discussed at length in workshop after the site walk held the previous month. Carol said there were issues that needed to be addressed. They were:
- The building on the site had received planning board approval as a day care home to operate in the barn several years ago. Five years have passed and that approval has expired.
- There is some leeway in the ordinance to zoning and dimensional standards because it is an existing building.
- The proposed use and the application from Mr. Nemet doesn’t meet the standards for parking, setbacks, buffering, the 2 driveways.
Carol said that the issue now before the Board is how the applicant will comply with current zoning to the greatest practical extent. The Board has the power to determine that extent either by action or waiving action. Carol asked for discussion from the members.
Bill Foster said he wished the parking area was bigger. Currently, village design standards call for the parking to be in back of the building. The parking lot that exists is along the side of the house. Mr. Nemet said his configuration was similar to his next door neighbor, Standish House of Pizza. Gus Favreau said that discussions in workshop looked at parking beyond the basketball pole so as to bring it into compliance. Carol said another issue was buffering and a sidewalk. Mr. Nemet asked why he needed a sidewalk when other businesses didn’t have sidewalks. Eleanor Dudek said that the intent for the Village Center Zone is to have sidewalks. Sideways don’t exist today and it is piecemeal, but some day, the entire village will have sidewalks. Mr.
Favreau said there needs to be consistency and each applicant will be asked to comply. Wayne Newbegin agreed that sidewalks needed to be installed, and he asked the Mr. Nemet if he had spoken with his landlord, Mark Floor.
Carol asked the client to come up with suggestions as to which items he could bring into compliance with the town’s ordinance. Issues are: parking, buffering, sidewalks and entrances. Carol asked the members if they wanted to meet the following Monday night at workshop with Mr. Nemet. Mr. Nemet said he couldn’t attend the workshop scheduled for September 18, 2006. Mr. Nemet further stated that installing a parking lot behind the building and removing grass wasn’t going to happen. Eleanor Dudek said as far as she was concerned, the parking issue wasn’t negotiable because all other businesses are asked to conform to the rules. Gus Favreau asked if the lawn area could be designated for parking of 3 or 4 cars. Mr. Foster said for him parking had to be
on gravel and parking on a lawn would not get his vote. He also stated that the sidewalk was required.
Carol Billington said that Mr. Nemet’s application in its present form wouldn’t get her vote. Further, she said the Planning Board couldn’t go into all of the details of what was required by the Board tonight and suggested that Mr. Nemet come to a workshop. She asked that Mr. Nemet come back with a new proposal that is somewhat consistent with what other applicants are required to do. She cautioned that the Board has some leeway because it is an existing building. Mr. Nemet couldn’t make the workshop scheduled for September 18th. Mr. Favreau asked if the project could be tabled until Mr. Nemet could attend a workshop. Wayne Newbegin asked if Mr. Nemet could speak to his landlord about the requirements of the site mandated by the land use code.
Gus Favreau made a motion to table the project until the October 16th workshop. Wayne Newbegin seconded the motion. All in favor. Motion carried.
05-08-07-06 CHADBOURNE ROAD SUBDIVISION/Gilbert Homes – Map 19, Lot 56, 733 Chadbourne Road
Cluster Subdivision Plan Review
Mr. Benson said he received an email from Sebago Technics and they are working out the details of the roadway design to see if they can connect with the right of way (Lucky’s Run) in the Corrine’s Place Subdivision. The meeting is scheduled for September 13th.
Wayne Newbegin made a motion to table the project and Peter Walker seconded the motion. All in favor and motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS:
Chair, Carol Billington, deviated from the prepared agenda and heard the request from the Kachinski’s before the Zoning Map Amendment agenda item.
01-09-11-06 COTTAGE SETBACK/Wm & Patricia Kachinski – Mp 49, Lot 15, 26 Sand Bar Rd
Shoreland Zoning Review
Alan Burnell was present representing William and Patricia Kachinski, owners of property at 26 Sandbar Road. Currently there is a small cottage on the lot and Mr. & Mrs. Kachinski want to rebuild/expand the cottage. He was ready to schedule a site walk with the Board members. A site walk was scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on Monday, September 18, at the site with a workshop immediately following at the town hall, if needed.
PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Map Amendment to Little Watchic Pond area
Carol Billington said this issue surfaced when R. J. Grondin & Sons, Inc. came to the planning board for a gravel pit expansion. There is an area that affects the gravel pit that is now shown as a fresh water wetland and a fresh water area there would be a higher standard for the gravel pit than would be required otherwise and the conditions on the ground don’t meet the DEP threshold for a freshwater wetland. That threshold is 10 acres and this area is about 5 acres. This is the reason for the change to amend the map. There was no public comment.
COMMUNICATION:
Final Approval of a Subdivision and the Filing of signed Final Subdivision Plan
Because this issue concerned Shadow Woods Subdivision, Chair, Carol Billington, removed herself from the discussion. Wayne Newbegin, Vice Chair, led the discussion for Shadow Woods Subdivision. Wayne said that Section 181-85-Final Approval and Filing says that nothing is finally approved until it is signed by the individual Planning Board members, Performance Guarantees funded, and the plan has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds.
Wayne asked the question: Does this give the developer the right to say, I don’t want to start developing this project yet and it will not be required that I start developing until such time as the plan has been signed, Performance Bonds in place and recorded at the registry. Is this the way that the Planning Board wants to interpret the code? One of the reasons for this discussion is the 90 day extensions—when should a developer ask for a 90 day extension. Code says that extensions can be approved after final approval with signatures. Wayne stated, “Is there something wrong with our ordinance.” Or, do we say to any developer, “No you don’t have to ask for any extension until Final Plans are signed.”
Bill Foster asked, “An extension for what?” Bud explained that it would be an extension for filing at the Registry of Deeds. Bill said he didn’t feel an extension was necessary because the plan hasn’t been signed. Bud explained that there are 2 or 3 new members of the Board who were not a party for approving the project and the signing has been postponed because there is no plan before the Board to sign that has the conditions of approval listed on the plan. Bud said after signing the Final Plan, then the 90 day extensions need to be requested.
Wayne Newbegin asked how long can the Board wait before signing the plan? Can they bring it in 2 years later? Eleanor stated that it might not work because there could be 3 or 4 new Board members that had nothing to do with the original submission or would that matter. Several members said it didn’t matter. Bill Foster asked why this issue was coming up? Wayne Newbegin said that real estate is slowing down a little and a developer might want to put off construction for a year. However, once the plan is signed and recorded, an extension of 90 days is the most than anyone can get to an extension. All agreed that the 90 days in this case is not an issue because the signing and recording of the plan hasn’t taken place and the performance guarantees are not in place.
Bill Foster asked how long can the Board wait? There is nothing in the code that addresses this issue. Bud Benson said that intention of the Ordinance is to protect the potential owners and by not recording that plan, they are protected. Wayne Newbegin asked if there was a hole in the Ordinance? Bud Benson said it is an issue for the Ordinance Committee to address. At the conclusion of the discussion, members concurred that no extension was needed for Shadow Woods Subdivision. Discussion ended on this topic.
Carol Billington brought up the subject of the Comprehensive Plan. It is written and now is a good time for the Planning Board to do some future planning. One way to do that is to hold a 2nd workshop each month that is to talk about ordinances, planning, etc. The Ordinance Committee is the only group that can bring changes to the Planning Board. Carol felt that the group could talk, think, plan and provide items to the Ordinance Committee. It was decided to have the discussion at the end of the workshop scheduled to take place the following Monday evening, September 18th.
There being no more business to conduct. Bill Foster made a motion to adjourn and Eleanor Dudek seconded the motion. All in favor and motion carried.
These minutes were prepared and submitted by Donna Sawyer, Secretary to the Planning Board.
| 
